Live data from Hacker News

A new upstream project to break up Docker into independent components

github.com

51–60 of 321 posts

Re: A new upstream project to break up Docker into independent components

#51
post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Living here, I don't think this use is common in the UK at all.

But "moby" is rhyming slang for "sick" (as in not healthy)! Appropriate in this case? Hopefully not.

There's less obscure examples:

- nonce (infosec) - paedophile

- gyp (node) - offensive nickname for gypsies.

Re: A new upstream project to break up Docker into independent components

#52
post #26

This certainly won't cause any confusion going forward.

If you`ve hit the wall in between multiple container infrastructure orchestration platforms I think the potential this provides is pretty big, and will have a lot to say for Enterprise adoption.

Separating out the shared commodity container stack points towards plug-and-play cross-vendor container stacks based on standardized APIs. Puppet, Chef, Ansible, Azure, AWS, VmWare, Kubernetes, etc etc: todays market is a divergent mess. Being able to mix-and-match configuration tools, clustering tools, and management interfaces will get us to best-of-breed solutions. It should enable plug-and-play components that today, amidst a dizzying array of incompatibility, generally force you onto wholesale stacks.

Props to Docker for investing in the shared eco-system and risking the brand confusion to push the industry towards the next step.

This doesn`t impact users of Docker or containerized app devs, people won`t be setting up a Moby stackexchange site any time soon. This is big news for the devs of container platforms though :)

Re: A new upstream project to break up Docker into independent components

#53

I have no idea why they'd want to change such a great name. I am very disappointed. http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=docker

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.

Of course it was the first thing I thought of when I originally heard the name -- what else could it possibly mean? I assume they changed the name because somebody finally pointed out the first definition of docker on urbandictionary. But what was so dirty about my phrasing, other than saying the name of the project itself? (And it's only a myth that it's dirty, unless you never bathe.) Shouldn't any mention of that name be flagged, not just my message? Leave it to the prudes to shoot the messenger... ;)

Re: A new upstream project to break up Docker into independent components

#54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

but you're not my parent poster...and you didn't actually answer the question about whether it had negative connotations. (specifically, the term "docker" doesn't appear on that page in that form.) I am asking whether it's the first thing my parent poster, or anyone, would first think of, for example if the project were named "wanker".

Here in Amsterdam it has positive connotations in the gay community. I just want to get a Docker t-shirt before they all run out.

Oh, so you weren't being sarcastic. (The comment I originally replied to, where you call it great, actually sounds very sarcastic/mean.)

Anyway that is pretty obscure. Thanks for the info, I guess.

Re: A new upstream project to break up Docker into independent components

#55
post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But "moby" is rhyming slang for "sick" (as in not healthy)! Appropriate in this case? Hopefully not.

There's less obscure examples: - nonce (infosec) - paedophile - gyp (node) - offensive nickname for gypsies.

And then there's mongo, gimp and git. I've just always assumed "docker" was in the same vein.

Now they have to deal with the even more obvious connotations of "moby".

Out of the frying pan and into the fire!

Well, at least "docker" isn't transitioning to "scissorer".

Re: A new upstream project to break up Docker into independent components

#56
What a horrible title.

Docker isn't being renamed to Moby, but rather all of the open source components are being spun out into a new umbrella OSS org called Moby.

No need to s/docker/moby anywhere.

This is going to end up being a case study in how not to make announcements, because the news is otherwise big/interesting.

Re: A new upstream project to break up Docker into independent components

#57

Excerpts 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…

> Enterprise IT and development teams looking for a ready-to-use, commercially supported container platform. We recommend Docker EE instead.

I'm sure they do. If I were involved in a situation like that I would definitely check this out, just to make sure that their recommendation is not just a way to protect their income stream. 'Don't look there' is the forbidden fruit theory at work, of course everybody will look there.

Re: A new upstream project to break up Docker into independent components

#58
post #23

This 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.

It's quite clever actually. First you get half the world behind your open source project and then with a little sleight of hand that suddenly becomes a valuable commercial brand.

Not the first time this is done either.

Re: A new upstream project to break up Docker into independent components

#60
post #33

Why 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.

Oh, because it's true. Their employees were fairly outspoken about it at Dockercon. I had one just dramatically and rudely turn and walk away from me mid-sentence when I mentioned I was using Kubernetes.

Hi, I'm the founder of Docker. That is very surprising and absolutely not OK. I'm sorry that you experienced this. Could you contact me directly at solomon@docker.com to give me more details?

There is no animosity towards kubernetes, quite the contrary. We are working with the kubernetes community to integrate the individual components of Docker, so that everyone can reuse each other's code and ideas.

For example:

- we're actively working on a containerd+CRI integration.

- there's great technical discussions about supporting CNI in SwarmKit

- we are participating in the early CSI (common storage interface) discussions along with the Mesos and Kubernetes communities.

- we are discussing the possibility of participating in the Kubernetes secrets implementation work, since we invested a lot in SwarmKit secrets and some of that work could be reused, or at least discussed for reference.

In short: no animosity. Not sure what happened to you at Dockercon but we will look into it.

Post reply on HN