A new upstream project to break up Docker into independent components
31–40 of 321 posts
Re: A new upstream project to break up Docker into independent components
#32Re: A new upstream project to break up Docker into independent components
#33Why am I having the feeling that Docker Inc is being pissed about everyone making money off docker except Docker Inc. themselves ? This is not nice.
Re: A new upstream project to break up Docker into independent components
#34Excerpts from mobyproject.org give a much better explanation: Moby is an open framework created by Docker to assemble specialized container systems without reinventing the wheel. It provides a “lego set” of dozens of standard components and a framework for assembling them into custom platforms. Audience Moby is recommended for anyone who wants to assemble a container-based system, this includes: Hackers who want to c…
Re: A new upstream project to break up Docker into independent components
#35More information can be found there: https://github.com/moby/moby/pull/32691 > Docker is transitioning all of its open source collaborations to the Moby project going forward. Should I understand that the core team wants to keep the brand "Docker" but use it in a commercial way, while Moby will be the underlying open source code? Is it Docker/Moby = RHEL/Fedora ? or Docker/Moby = Mongodb.com/Mongodb.org?
Also from that thread: Moby = open source development Docker CE = free product release based on Moby Docker EE = commercial product release based on Docker CE. Nothing is dead; and everything that was open-source remains open-source. In fact we are open-sourcing new things.
Re: A new upstream project to break up Docker into independent components
#36This is the one of the worst kind of business decision one can make. But I am not theirCTO and CEO. While not the same as Vagrant being replaced (and then revived because the alternate project was a burden), feels the same shitty decision IMO. Plently of people run successful OSS under the same name. Disappointing.
Dockers underlying components are quite usable for many solutions in other projects and platforms. Now, instead of having "Docker TM" components in their stack, OSS projects can connect the tools without seeming to support a specific commercial provider.
Presently there is a lot of confusion and OSS projects are hesitant to use Docker components because of the perception of a closed eco-system. Now the project has clearer commercial branding and a more appealing package set for OSS consumers.
Remember: many of the most important actors we need to collaborate in this space are direct commercial competitors to Docker Inc.
Re: A new upstream project to break up Docker into independent components
#37Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm sure you'll clean up your phrasing (since you're getting downvoted for some reason) but could I ask, is this something you really first thought of when you heard the name? Is it UK slang? I've never heard it. I don't think you should be downvoted for the info (even though it doesn't actually apply, they will keep the name for their commercial stuff) as it's news to me.
Living here, I don't think this use is common in the UK at all.
Re: A new upstream project to break up Docker into independent components
#38More information can be found there: https://github.com/moby/moby/pull/32691 > Docker is transitioning all of its open source collaborations to the Moby project going forward. Should I understand that the core team wants to keep the brand "Docker" but use it in a commercial way, while Moby will be the underlying open source code? Is it Docker/Moby = RHEL/Fedora ? or Docker/Moby = Mongodb.com/Mongodb.org?
from https://github.com/moby/moby/pull/32691 as well: > defining an open, community-centric governance inspired by the Fedora project
I don't think the same applies to Docker Inc. so my initial reaction is step on the brakes here.