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

161–170 of 321 posts

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

#161

Post by vkat »

ilovecaching wrote: post #153
shykes wrote: post #75

Hi all, Docker founder here. It appears that the explanation in the pull request is not very clear. Sorry about that. We didn't expect the PR to be the first thing people read: there is a new website at mobyproject.org. Unfortunately Github is struggling under the load, and I can't update the PR text to clarify. Here is an updated version with some clarifications: Docker is transitioning all of its open source collab…

Do you know that keeping your users in a constant state of confusion is not the way to convince them that you're building a stable and secure product? Also, isn't it kind of ironic that you built your company on OSS and then invited a well known destroyer of OSS onto your main stage? Plus, I want my DockerCon money back. What exactly did you announce besides multi-stage builds at the general sessions that is actually…

I thought LinuxKit and InfraKit were great announcements.

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

#162

Post by [deleted] »

jacquesm wrote: post #157
matt4077 wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

> "Docker Community Edition" That's not Docker. That's Moby.

[deleted]

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

#163

Post by user5994461 »

jacquesm wrote: post #157
matt4077 wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

> "Docker Community Edition" That's not Docker. That's Moby.

It's gonna take more than a github announcement to refresh the memory of 1 million developers ;)

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

#164

Post by douche »

user5994461 wrote: post #139
ernestbro wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Or equally likely, "That electronic musician from the 90s? Huh?"

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

#165

Post by ohdrat »

lprd wrote: post #148
finid wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Honestly, I wish rkt would get some more momentum. In my opinion it's superior to Docker.

where's the Rocket Hub? Seriously how long is Docker Hub expected to float up there? Some are good quality, all the versions of tomcat for example. How long can such quality continue to exist?

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

#166

Post by user5994461 »

Khao wrote: post #154
stephenr wrote: post #77

What is it with tech companies and fucking terrible name/branding analogies? Docker. Ok, works with containers I get... wait. Your logo is a WHALE with a bunch of shipping containers on it. You know that whales DISAPPEAR underwater for hours at a time, and shipping containers are NOT MEANT TO DO THAT? Ok ok maybe it was an honest mistake hey whats this new thing moby.. wait. Whales. Moby. Moby dick? Your project is n…

A+ post. Funny rambling backed up by a crazy well detailed article and you get downvoted by the HN hive mind. Docker is the ...ahem... whale in the room that you shouldn't criticize ever!

Author of the article here!

Just updated the titles to include moby.

Maybe I should change the links as well, then it can get reposted on HN and reach the first page along the announcement :D

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

#168

Post by user5994461 »

colept wrote: post #39

What about all the SEO, Stack overflow questions, and the differentiation between the two(?) platforms?

The SEO is not a problem.

1) It's not conflicting with anything major (Unless it does, short 4 letters names are way too common).

2) It will transfer along the URL redirections

3) Docker has enough credit and following to gather SEO on any new domain and product name that comes out

The new pages will be top links on google very quickly. No worries about that, machines are fine!

The trouble is with humans, they can't keep up. All the existing content -documentation, community, articles- will stay under the Docker name, forever splitting the knowledge and bringing confusion onto mankind.

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

#169

Post by dstroot »

diminoten wrote: post #87
vosper wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but the CTO wants to be seen as being innovative for adopting this new technology and ita called docker not moby! I see this kind of cynicism / snark all the time on HN (especially when it comes to Docker) but is it really warranted? Surely it's the rare exception? I've never met senior people who couldn't understand the naming difference between the open source version of a thing and the enterprise-branded version…

This idea isn't cynical, it's branding. The whole point of creating a brand like Moby is to trigger conversations about what level of service you're getting when you say you're using "Moby" vs. "Docker". The CTO hears they're using "Moby", which for the first time may make the CTO realize that some of the infrastructure for his business is relying on unsupported technology (or maybe he intuitively realized it but now…

Why do we keep equating OSS to "unsupported"? Some of the OSS I use is far better supported than licensed software. Drop an issue on GitHub and it gets fixed in a few weeks.

- a CIO

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

#170

Post by BinaryIdiot »

ilovecaching wrote: post #153
shykes wrote: post #75

Hi all, Docker founder here. It appears that the explanation in the pull request is not very clear. Sorry about that. We didn't expect the PR to be the first thing people read: there is a new website at mobyproject.org. Unfortunately Github is struggling under the load, and I can't update the PR text to clarify. Here is an updated version with some clarifications: Docker is transitioning all of its open source collab…

Do you know that keeping your users in a constant state of confusion is not the way to convince them that you're building a stable and secure product? Also, isn't it kind of ironic that you built your company on OSS and then invited a well known destroyer of OSS onto your main stage? Plus, I want my DockerCon money back. What exactly did you announce besides multi-stage builds at the general sessions that is actually…

> Also, isn't it kind of ironic that you built your company on OSS and then invited a well known destroyer of OSS onto your main stage?

I think I missed this; who are you referring to? I scrolled through the list and didn't recognize anyone that I would consider a "destroyer of OSS" so I'm not sure if I missed something, if you're just exaggerating or a little bit of both.

Post reply on HN