fsword/fig_bug_app — explained in plain English
Analysis updated 2026-07-18 · repo last pushed 2015-02-12
Reproduce and compare how Docker and Fig handle .dockerignore rules differently
Investigate why excluded files like a log folder end up in a container image via Fig but not plain Docker
Use as a historical reference for a known Fig bug before it was replaced by Docker Compose
Learn how inconsistent .dockerignore handling can lead to unexpected or sensitive files in a container
| fsword/fig_bug_app | 0verflowme/alarm-clock | 0verflowme/seclists | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Language | — | CSS | — |
| Last pushed | 2015-02-12 | 2022-10-03 | 2020-05-03 |
| Maintenance | Dormant | Dormant | Dormant |
| Setup difficulty | easy | easy | easy |
| Complexity | 2/5 | 2/5 | 1/5 |
| Audience | developer | vibe coder | ops devops |
Figures from each repo's GitHub metadata at analysis time.
Documents a historical bug, Fig itself has since been replaced by Docker Compose.
This repository is a test case that demonstrates a bug in how Fig (an early tool for managing Docker containers) handles the .dockerignore file. The .dockerignore file is supposed to tell Docker which files and folders to exclude when building a container image, similar to how .gitignore works in version control. The problem is straightforward: when you build a Docker image directly using the docker build command, the .dockerignore rules work correctly. Files and folders listed in .dockerignore (in this case, a log folder) don't get included in the final container. However, when the same setup is run through Fig, those exclusion rules are ignored, and the log folder ends up in the container anyway. The repository's owner is asking whether this is actually how Fig is supposed to work, or if it's a genuine bug. Fig was an early orchestration tool (now incorporated into Docker Compose) that simplified managing multiple connected containers. This repository serves as evidence that Fig wasn't respecting the same exclusion rules that plain Docker honored. The test case makes it easy to reproduce the issue and compare the two behaviors side by side, you can see the file listings differ between a regular Docker build and a Fig deployment. If you're working with containerized applications, this kind of inconsistency matters because it can lead to unexpected files or sensitive data ending up in your running containers. The repository doesn't provide a fix, but rather documents the discrepancy so that developers or maintainers of Fig could investigate and address it. Today, Fig has been replaced by Docker Compose, which handles this differently, but this repo remains a useful historical record of the issue.
A test case repo documenting a bug where Fig, an early Docker orchestration tool, ignored .dockerignore rules that plain Docker builds honored correctly.
Dormant — no commits in 2+ years (last push 2015-02-12).
Setup difficulty is rated easy, with roughly 5min to a first successful run.
Mainly developer.
This repo across BitVibe Labs
Don't trust strangers blindly. Verify against the repo.