Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A new upstream project to break up Docker into independent components

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 321 posts

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

#131

Post by matt4077 »

jacquesm wrote: post #123
user5994461 wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is that clever? You just renamed your brand away and lost all the credit from it.

Because the commercial entity will keep the name so all the docker mindshare suddenly 'points' to a thing that people would have to pay for. If they had renamed the commercial stuff to Moby they'd have to start from scratch, now there are thousands of articles and links that say 'go get docker' intending to point you to the open source stuff, instead directing you to the commercial stuff. A very effective bait-and-sw…

What, exactly, is the bait in this case? The name? Because it sure seems as if I could still get everything as I could before. Do you really think there are people who reads a tutorial and ends up buying Docker Enterprise Edition for 9,950$ because they failed to see the "Docker Community Edition" link, which by the way, will still be available?

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

#132

Post by ohdrat »

markbnj wrote: post #86
kentt wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

That's just silly. Kubernetes is an open source project too, and I don't think Google is making a ton of money from it.

Smaller vendors are making money from turnkey k8s. There are at least two I won't mention.

Docker is out on a limb with the dynamic mesh, nobody else is using the p2p gossip protocol that I know of and there are problems, and Docker paid-for support is just dropping tickets related to networking issues making this work. The service outages caused by mesh gossip problems are simply measureable by NewRelic free ping synthetic monitors. Docker is getting paid--they are falling down on support.

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

#133

Post by matt4077 »

tcrews wrote: post #61
bonesss wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Docker brand is "tainted" in the eyes of their commercial competitors who don't want to use shared tools/libraries. By creating an independent project commercial actors in the Enterprise space can share resources, components, and standards without having to explain why they`re better than Docker even though they`re built on top of Docker. This is a great move towards industry and container infrastructure orchestr…

It's not the brand that is tainted. People simply cannot trust their projects on someone else's commercial objectives. There is no indication this is changing.

Yeah, good luck with finding a technology stack that doesn't rely on any products developed by companies...

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

#134

Post by riquito »

shykes wrote: post #103
zabcik wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So moby now uses containerd, which I guess is not related to systemd even though systemd also has its own container system. Are there any components to moby that are OSS and a part of the linux stack or is this whole endeavor to break away from linux dependencies?

> So moby now uses containerd Correct. Moby uses containerd because Docker uses containerd. > which I guess is not related to systemd You guessed correctly. > even though systemd also has its own container system Correct I believe systemd uses a tool called nspawn to isolate processes in containers. We don't use systemd/nspawn, but I think it would be a cool customization to build a Moby assembly that uses systemd. >…

If Moby depends on LinuxKit, why the LinuxKit's README ask you to build the Moby tool as first thing, and all the examples imply using moby? Shouldn't LinuxKit be agnostic of the existence of Moby?

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

#135

Post by matt4077 »

ohdrat wrote: post #125
pi-rat wrote: post #20

From comment by @stykes on the pull request: 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.

thank you, makes sense now. why do they think we think that you can take an open source thing and make it closed source? All you can do is force them to buy commercial licenses by using a GPL on Moby. That is common use of GPL after the fact (see ExtJS history), but I'm not sure how they get around the viral aspect of GPL when they are using source from GPL project in their commercial offering. They'd have to be comp…

Who's "they" in this little conspiracy theory?

There's nothing viral about using GPL code. Your docker containers are probably running on Linux, which is also GPL, and that has neither infected nor affected you, has it?

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

#136

Post by matt4077 »

bandrami wrote: post #22
pi-rat wrote: post #20

From comment by @stykes on the pull request: 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.

The pre-emptive defensiveness of that comment says a lot...

And now we've come full circle to justifying the negativity with the very sentence that was inserted to defuse it...

Good thing it's all OSS. Don't try to solve problems with a pitchfork, when a simple fork will do.

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

#137

Post by matt4077 »

heeey wrote: post #46

This is a bait and switch of whale proportions. Docker used to be the open source part. Now that's being moved out of the way so when you search for Docker you get the paid offerings. The goal is to confuse the people who haven't been following this into thinking Docker is a thing you pay Docker (the company) for. It's brilliant.

Brilliant! Brilliant! I was just searching for "Docker" after reading a tutorial, and now I spent my inheritance on Docker Enterprise Edition, even though there's also a Community Edition, on the same website, which will continue to exists, and this theory is obviously insane, and nothing of this makes any sense, but why start with goodwill, when conspiracy-fuelled hate will do, and when literally the future of the free world is at stake.

Brilliant! Brilliant! Bravo!

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

#138

Post by venture_lol »

ernestbro wrote: post #34
glitcher wrote: post #17

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…

Moby is the fedora like oss project and docker is the RHEL like commercial product. Purely a clever rebranding job. Timing is perfect - now that enterprise is adopting the technology, when you tell your boss you adopted moby he/she will say- but the CTO wants to be seen as being innovative for adopting this new technology and ita called docker not moby!

It would give you the opportunity to step up and be a trusted source of information and clarity

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

#139

Post by user5994461 »

ernestbro wrote: post #34
glitcher wrote: post #17

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…

Moby is the fedora like oss project and docker is the RHEL like commercial product. Purely a clever rebranding job. Timing is perfect - now that enterprise is adopting the technology, when you tell your boss you adopted moby he/she will say- but the CTO wants to be seen as being innovative for adopting this new technology and ita called docker not moby!

When you tell your boss you adopted moby, he's like "WTF is that?!".

If you were already migrating to Docker, now you have to explain that the project name changed overnight without explanation, and it's hurting your credibility pretty bad. It's also gonna bring a lot of confusion onto everyone for a very long time.

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

#140

Post by finid »

cptskippy wrote: post #120
shykes wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So moby now uses containerd Correct. Moby uses containerd because Docker uses containerd. > which I guess is not related to systemd You guessed correctly. > even though systemd also has its own container system Correct I believe systemd uses a tool called nspawn to isolate processes in containers. We don't use systemd/nspawn, but I think it would be a cool customization to build a Moby assembly that uses systemd. >…

>> or is this whole endeavor to break away from linux dependencies? > Moby works great with Linux and will continue to. In fact you can build a complete custom Linux system with Moby, thanks to LinuxKit. (But you can also target an existing Linux system, LinuxKit is optional). I think the question was more along the lines of "Are these changes being made to add support for other Operating Systems?" and less "Are you…

Somehow I feel that with this announcement and his (defensive) answers to simple questions that call for clarification, that the interest in rkt just went up some.
Post reply on HN