That is indeed true. All the use cases still assume a single main
application process, and therefore a single start command, and owner of
$PORT. Any additional processes are meant as helpers inside the container
only (either short-lived subprocesses, or long-running sidecars).



If multiple app processes are required, is there a reason not to run them
in separate containers?



Cheers,

-Jan



*From: *John Liptak <john.h.liptak(a)gmail.com>


*Reply-To: *"Discussions about Cloud Foundry projects and the system
overall." <cf-dev(a)lists.cloudfoundry.org>

*Date: *Thursday, November 3, 2016 at 12:51

*To: *"Discussions about Cloud Foundry projects and the system overall." <
cf-dev(a)lists.cloudfoundry.org>
*Subject: *[cf-dev] Re: Re: Proposal for supporting the application of
multiple buildpacks to a CF app



I don't see any consideration in the document for having multiple start
commands and picking who gets the default PORT.



On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 1:37 PM Stephen Levine <slevine(a)pivotal.io> wrote:

+ Pivotal PMs/Anchors for visibility



On Tue, Nov 1, 2016 at 11:54 AM, Stephen Levine <slevine(a)pivotal.io>
wrote:

Hi All,



The CF Buildpacks team and CAPI team are planning a coordinated effort to
introduce support for applying multiple buildpacks during CF application
staging. We would like to welcome any and all comments on our proposal[1]
from the community before we begin this effort in a few weeks.



A PDF is attached for those who have issues with Google Docs.



Thanks!

Stephen Levine

CF Buildpacks PM



[1]
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1YEzw_g1MRBzEOhSGNPVLHpyf2BGHqFITy38fsDnDBfI/edit?usp=sharing