mise

When `mise` Makes Sense

Mental model:

They overlap in “reproducible dev environment”, but at different layers.

Aspect	mise	Standard Containers (Docker/Podman)
Level	User-level tools & env vars on host	Full OS userspace (rootfs, processes, networking)
What it pins	Node/Python/Go/Terraform, CLIs, env vars, tasks	Base image, OS packages, tools, services
Isolation	None from host (shares OS, filesystem, processes)	Strong: separate filesystem, PID namespace, network, users
Performance/overhead	Almost zero; just uses host binaries it installs	Higher; container engine, image pull, start-up, cgroups, overlay FS
Reproducibility scope	“Same tool versions & commands on any dev machine/CI”	“Same OS image + tools everywhere (dev, CI, prod)”
Tooling dependency	No Docker/Podman required	Requires container runtime
Editor/IDE dependence	Editor-agnostic	Editor-agnostic; often integrated via Docker-based workflows
Typical lifecycle	`git clone` → `mise install` → `mise run test` on host	`docker build` → `docker run` / CI job / k8s deployment

Lower complexity for local dev
- No Dockerfiles, images, networking, or volumes needed just to:
  - Get the right Node/Python/Terraform versions.
  - Run test, lint, build commands.
- Good fit for “clone → run tests locally” workflows.
Fast startup and feedback
- No image build or pull; tools are already on disk.
- cd into project → correct versions are active immediately.
Single, cross-language tool/version manager
- One .mise.toml manages:
  - Multiple runtimes (Node, Python, Go, Java, Terraform, etc.).
  - Project env vars.
  - Tasks like build, test, format, migrate.
- Replaces a stack of per-language managers plus Make/just in many cases.
Better integration with host tools
- Uses your normal filesystem paths, shell history, OS services, GUI apps.
- Easier when dev tools must talk to:
  - Local browsers.
  - Native databases.
  - Other host processes.
Simpler onboarding
- New dev: install mise once → mise install in each repo.
- No need to understand Docker networking, volumes, or orchestration for simple projects.

Use containers (possibly alongside mise) when:

OS-level reproducibility or parity with production is important
- Need the same Linux base image, libc, and system libs as prod.
- Want “dev/CI/prod all use the same container image.”
You rely on system services or complex deps
- Databases, message brokers, daemons, specific OS packages (e.g., apt-get install ...).
- Multi-service setups (web + worker + DB) orchestrated with docker-compose/k8s.
You need strong isolation
- Avoid conflicts with host-installed tools or libraries.
- Sandboxed environments for running untrusted or experimental code.

A common pattern:

Docker image: sets base OS, system libs, system packages.
Inside the container you install and use mise to:
- Manage language runtimes and CLIs.
- Define tasks used by devs and CI (mise run test, mise run lint, etc.).

Benefits:

Same .mise.toml works inside containers, on bare metal dev machines, and in non-container CI.
Containers handle OS and services; mise handles tooling and workflows.

Use mise alone if your main need is: “Pin and share exact versions of dev tools and commands across machines, without Docker.”
Use containers (optionally with mise inside) if your main need is: “Reproduce an entire OS-level environment and/or run multi-service stacks that mirror production.”