Codecov Report

Patch coverage: 68.57% and project coverage change: +0.17% 🎉

Comparison is base (1311546) 57.72% compared to head (05a6da0) 57.90%.
Report is 2 commits behind head on main.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main   #10979      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   57.72%   57.90%   +0.17%     
==========================================
  Files         127      129       +2     
  Lines       11092    11160      +68     
==========================================
+ Hits         6403     6462      +59     
- Misses       4058     4060       +2     
- Partials      631      638       +7     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

scale used to be a docker-compose v1 command, so I don't think we need this to be introduced as an alpha command, just resurrect the legacy one

$ docker-compose-v1 scale --help
Set number of containers to run for a service.

Numbers are specified in the form `service=num` as arguments.
For example:

    $ docker-compose scale web=2 worker=3

Noting that we should update docs after merging this: https://docs.docker.com/compose/migrate/#unsupported-in-v2

The following were deprecated in Compose V1 and aren't supported in Compose V2:

• docker-compose scale. Use docker compose up --scale instead.

Ok my test assertions are fragiles as we can't bet which container will be removed 😬

scale_test.go:54: Running command: docker compose --project-directory fixtures/scale scale dbadmin=1
    scale_test.go:55: assertion failed: expression is false: strings.Contains(res.Combined(), "Container scale-basic-tests-dbadmin-1  Running"):  Container scale-basic-tests-dbadmin-2  Running

I'll improve this tomorrow

I'm surprised your assertion failed...I thought we'd made scale deterministic at some point, so that it would always leave the "oldest" (lowest-numbered) replicas

@milas I think the 2 replicas were created at the same time 🤷‍♂️
Anyway it's fix now and assertions are way more robust!