Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Improve the workflow instructions for setting up a Chainlink node by providing Windows/Mac/Linux docker instructions #74

Open
StephenFluin opened this issue May 7, 2021 · 2 comments · May be fixed by #550
Labels
Chainlink Nodes new content New content to be written.

Comments

@StephenFluin
Copy link
Contributor

No description provided.

@StephenFluin StephenFluin added the good first issue Good for newcomers label May 7, 2021
@PatrickAlphaC
Copy link
Contributor

Right now, running docker locally with docker is a bit of a headache. The docker gateway is different across platforms. It would be great if we had some tabs to show people how to run a chainlink node in docker no matter what platformt hey are working on.

@dwightjl dwightjl added new content New content to be written. and removed good first issue Good for newcomers labels Nov 15, 2021
@aelmanaa
Copy link
Collaborator

@dwightjl still relevant? There have been many changes on the page for the past year.

  • Running from the source section has been added and it points to the Chainlink README. If more details are needed then we should update the Chainlink README.
  • IMO, for docker install instructions, we should only point the users to the official link . Copying the install steps in our docs will force us to continuously monitor docker official installation docs (which is not ideal for maintenance)

@dwightjl dwightjl linked a pull request Mar 9, 2023 that will close this issue
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Chainlink Nodes new content New content to be written.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

4 participants