HackerReposA FIELD GUIDE TO OPEN SOURCE
ProSponsor the shelf♧ 0
← Back to top all-time
ko-build
ko
Go2019–2025
ko-build / ko

ko

Build and deploy Go applications

11Distinct people
12Mentions
0Explicit recommenders
8.6KGitHub stars
REPOSITORY AT A GLANCE

What to know before exploring

What it is

Build and deploy Go applications

GitHub

Where it is used

No documented product use was verified in the last source check.

What people are saying

No recommendation phrase was found in the indexed comments.

No classified warning is attached to this page. Read the discussions before treating silence as approval.

Also in these discussions

No other repository is repeatedly linked in the same discussions.

This week on Hacker News

Nov 7–Nov 14 UTC · Direct repository links and separately labeled related project stories. Indexed through 11/14/2026, 3:56:07 PM UTC.

No direct repository links were found in the indexed HN discussions over the past seven days. Older discussions are available below.

Mentions over time

HN mentions by year12 dated mentions

Observed mentions: 2019-05-21 23:38:19 UTC to 2025-04-09 05:51:50 UTC.

0123452019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 5 mentions; 5 submissions, 0 comments20192020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 2 mentions; 0 submissions, 2 comments2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 comments2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 comments20222023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 comments2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 2 mentions; 0 submissions, 2 comments2025

Counts come from the repository’s dated source evidence. Index cutoff: 2026-11-02 08:16:59 UTC.

View mention counts and date ranges
UTC ranges include their start and exclude their end. Select a period to filter the source evidence.
PeriodStart (UTC)End (exclusive, UTC)MentionsSubmissionsComments
20192019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC550
20202020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC202
20212021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC101
20222022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC101
20232023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC101
20242024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC000
20252025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2026-01-01 00:00:00 UTC202

What Hacker News says

12 sources
It's not a very good one, but it is ubiquitous (it's also better if you remember to include the right syntax marker that enables heredocs): # syntax=docker/dockerfile:1 I suspect that the GP was really asking "why not use a different tool", like buildah <https://buildah.io>, buildpacks <https://buildpacks.io>, nix <https://nix.dev/tutorials/nixos/building-and-running-docker-...>, kaniko <https://github.com/GoogleContainerTools/kaniko>, ko <https://github.com/ko-build/ko>, bazel <https://github.com/bazel-contrib/rules_oci>, apko <https://github.com/chainguard-dev/apko>, or other tools. Each of those has tradeoffs compared to Dockerfiles (I have no need for bazel, but if I did, then adding `rules_oci` might be a win-win, rather than using a Dockerfile). If I used Nix, then the Nix dockerTools would be a huge win (I don't use Nix). If I
Read the rest
were shipping Go programs, `ko` would likely be a good baseline.
In Dockerfmt: A Dockerfile Formatter
maybe there are some best error practices out there, but people don't follow that. As an example, I just went to github.com, got the top-trending go project ("ko"], search for error and arrived at this line in [0]: dtodf, err := os.Open(filepath.Join(filepath.Dir(file), "diffid-to-descriptor")) if err != nil { return nil, fmt.Errorf("opening diffid-to-descriptor: %w", err) } See how they forgot to put filename in the error message? if there is some sort of error with the file, you'll have to resort to strace to find out what the name is... Not to mention that this very function returns json parse errors without context, and the caller "getMeta" calls multiple functions and returns the errors without context as well... best practices are nice, but fully automatic is even better. The minimum-effort path in Python produced
Read the rest
vastly more useful traces than in Go, and unfortunately too many programmers go mininum-effort path. [0] https://github.com/ko-build/ko/blob/cfc13deeb6417d7e1582f031...
In Python errors as values: Comparing useful patterns from Rust and Go
> Comparing image digests won’t work; they will never match. This is a strong assertion with no further explanation. It reads like a generic truth about container images, but it's certainly possible to achieve this, as referenced later: > Sidebar: Various folks in the container ecosystem are looking at enabling deterministic images. We welcome that. See Building deterministic Docker images with Bazel and DETERMINISTIC DOCKER IMAGES WITH GO MICROSERVICES. I'll agree that docker makes it _really_ difficult to build and consume reproducible images (for a variety of reasons, see https://github.com/google/go-containerregistry/issues/895#is... and https://twitter.com/lorenc_dan/status/1343921451792003073 for a sampling of interesting ones), but there is more to the container ecosystem than docker or Dockerfiles. Shameless plug: I help maintain
Read the rest
ko (https://github.com/google/ko), which can achieve reproducible builds for go projects without much fuss. It also leans heavily on go's excellent support for cross-compilation to produce multi-platform images, trivially. > There are two cases where the container-diff tool will report that the registry and local images that you are comparing are the same (in terms of Docker history lines), but will be misleading because the images are actually different. While container-diff is great, it can obscure what's really going on a bit. If you're interested in uncovering exactly why the digest of the image you built is different from what was published, please forgive another shameless plug for crane (https://github.com/google/go-containerregistry/blob/main/cmd...), a tool I wrote to expose most of the functionality of go-containerregistry (https://github.com/google/go-containerregistry), which is the library both container-diff and ko use under the hood. Forgive the sparse documentation, but it should be relatively straightforward for anyone familiar with the registry API and data structures, as the commands map pretty directly to registry functionality. Using crane, you can easily inspect the image in the registry directly to compare the manifests and blobs that make up an image. For example, one reason that the digests might never match is that these images are somewhat strangely wrapped as singleton manifest lists: https://gist.github.com/jonjohnsonjr/ffba104ca504b5bb4a1f227... It makes some sense to me that they might want to do this to prevent folks from pulling this on windows, but usually you would only encounter manifest lists for multi-platform images. Even if these builds were reproducible, you would have to compare the digest of what you built with sha256:9a210bb9cbbdba5ae2199b659551959cd01e0299419f4118d111f8443971491a -- not the sha256:fb1a43b50c7047e5f28e309268a8f5425abc9cb852124f6828dcb0e4f859a4a1 that docker outputs, as shown in the article. The tag used for this example (mcr.microsoft.com/dotnet/sdk:5.0-alpine) has since been updated. Comparing this with the original using container-diff just tells us that the size changed: https://gist.github.com/jonjohnsonjr/90c2def551833c8cacf3264... But looking at the actual manifests, config blobs, and layers using crane is often faster and more interesting: https://gist.github.com/jonjohnsonjr/283eab27d996b2f4cc04553... My intention with crane is to be easily composable so that you can use familiar tools like tar, sort, diff, jq, etc. (To be fair to container-diff, you can use the -t flag to show similar things.) I realize this is not really the point of the article, but it's a huge pet peeve of mine that everyone has just given up on understanding what's going on with their images because the tooling UX makes everything so opaque. If the digest of something doesn't match, you should know why! It's as if `git push --force` was on by default and everyone has just accepted that reality. Now to read the rest of the article :)
In How .NET container images are maintained

MAKE YOURSELF AT HOME

A few shortcuts

/
Search the collection
?
Open this guide
Esc
Close dialogs and navigation

Your saved repositories and interests stay in this browser.