19 comments
This would be interesting to me as well.  We're looking at docker as a way to wrap up our python interpreter in development environments.
0
since the original post docker-enter has been refined and works pretty well now: https://github.com/jpetazzo/nsenter
0
and now in docker 1.3 there is an offical command to enter the process space of a running container:
docker exec

https://docs.docker.com/reference/commandline/cli/#exec
0
Same here.  By the way there's also an opened question on StackOverflow: http://stackoverflow.com/q/27343452/1030960
0
Support for Docker in PyCharm would be a great feature!
0
+1 for supporting "remote" interpreters inside Docker containers
0
I will buy PyCharm Pro once this out.
1
Did anyone in the thread actually add a request for this to https://youtrack.jetbrains.com/issues/PY ? Or are we all just waiting and hoping someone else does it..?

UPDATE: added formal request to tracking system https://youtrack.jetbrains.com/issue/PY-15476
0
thanks @blackstone. Yes... just waiting and hoping :-)
I did not know https://youtrack.jetbrains.com/issues/PY existed.
0
Heh neither did I until I came here searching for docker integration with PyCharm. I saw it suggested in another thread.

Judging by the chatter on the internets (Twitter, soverflow, blogs, etc) this has been wanted for a few years. With the addition of docker exec I am hoping its minimal effort for the PyCharm devs, and maybe we can see this in a future release :)

I still feel like there should be a way to trick PyCharm into using the docker container's interpreter through some crafty use of docker exec and a bash script, but I haven't found any solutions that work yet.
0
Is there an actual way to "vote" for it, or is it just a "+1" comment ?
0
Yep, right hand side, just beneath "Verified NO", there's a little hand icon next to "Voters", click it once :-)
0
You can also just do a +1 comment and the system will count that as a vote – that's a feature of YouTrack
0
Oh ok, thanks, good to know !  Note: requires to be logged in.
0
For those others that are curious about this: neither "+ 5000" nor "+ ∞" seem to work, so it doesn't accept numbers larger than one or lemniscates :)
0
Just had to test the limits of the system, didn't you :-)
0

Please sign in to leave a comment.