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

201–210 of 321 posts

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

#201

Post by dserodio »

BinaryIdiot wrote: post #170
ilovecaching wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Oracle is the OSS destroyer (see MySQL, Hudson, Java...)

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

#202

Post by virsimil »

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…

If you're not paying Docker for Docker you're not a user they care about confusing. By building a large community and Google footprint for "Docker" you've served your purpose to the company. Now you can go and play in the corner with your Moby. Just don't call it "Docker" anymore because they own that trademark.

But they're certainly doing a lot with the product this year. It starts with cashing in the open source goodwill and rerouting the eyeballs to their enterprise offerings.

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

#203

Post by alexk »

thockingoog wrote: post #196
alexk wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> More recently, I was part of a discussion where Kubernetes has decided to roll its own logging infrastructure, while leaving important parts like log rotation still undecided.... driving me even closer to the Docker ecosystem. Can you please refer to this particular discussion and link to it here, I would like to make sure that this indeed is what happened.

I don;t think that is really what happened. :) As part of the runtime abstraction, kubernetes must necessarily decide how to handle stdout/stderr logs. Not having a decision for something at a given point in time is not exactly a bad thing.

Thanks, this seemed to be quite unusual decision to be made by the Kubernetes dev community, that's why I've asked.

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

#204

Post by jetsnoc »

atgreen wrote: post #128
jetsnoc wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think your wrong. Someone being that entitled and ignorant must be the rare exception in 2017. Maybe I'm in a bubble too. The conversation usually goes like this with my folk: I get it, Moby is the OSS version and can be easily stood up and you don't see the need for extra cost. I'm glad you're trying to reduce expenses, but I don't mind paying for 24x7 Enterprise Support and it gives me piece of mind and pri…

By calling Moby the "OSS version" you are implying that Docker EE isn't open source. Honest question... is it true that Docker EE contains proprietary code, or did you mean to say "community version"?

I probably should have written that as Community Version. I'm very uninformed when it comes to all of this and the Docker, Inc. ecosystem. Sorry about that :)

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

#205

Post by alpb »

wstrange wrote: post #159
zobzu wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google does not need kubernetes to be successful or make any money to survive. Docker, on the other hand........

Indirectly I think Google does need Kubernetes to be successful. If they can drive adoption, it makes it much easier to move customers away from AWS and on to GCE.

Kubernetes benefits all parties. AWS can move customers away from GCE using Kubernetes, too. As a customer, you get more freedom and flexibility.

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

#206

Post by ilovecaching »

ThrowawayR2 wrote: post #185
ilovecaching wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not going to name names, if it's not obvious go watch the last general session keynote. Edit: See my response below

Well, guess I'll do the detective work. Here's a link to the Docker blog that has the two keynotes: https://blog.docker.com/2016/06/dockercon-general-session-vi... Guest speakers for the last (second) general keynote were: -Guest speaker #1: Docker and Microsoft demo by Mark Russinovich, CTO Microsoft Azure -Guest speaker #2: Docker at ADP by Keith Fulton, CTO, ADP And just somehow I sense that the parent poster isn'…

I am primarily talking about the Oracle/Docker partnership. Oracle is well known for acquiring open source projects and stripping them down to skeleton crews to remove competition, pushing the developers who built the OSS onto forks. Microsoft has improved its image, it's still got plenty of skeletons in its closet though. Remember the "Get the facts campaign"?

The fact that they’re constantly brought on stage to be paraded as a symbol of enterprise maturity and stability just tells me that the product is not mature or stable enough to speak for itself, and that the original OSS community really has no say in the direction of Docker while enterprises are sold the ship and wheel for their rubber stamp approvals.

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

#207

Post by [deleted] »

ilovecaching wrote: post #173
BinaryIdiot wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

I'm not going to name names, if it's not obvious go watch the last general session keynote. Edit: See my response below

[deleted]

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

#209

Post by mos_basik »

dserodio wrote: post #201
BinaryIdiot wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

Oracle is the OSS destroyer (see MySQL, Hudson, Java...)

OpenSolaris, OpenSSO, OpenOffice...

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

#210

Post by NDizzle »

problems wrote: post #192
ThrowawayR2 wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, guess I'll do the detective work. Here's a link to the Docker blog that has the two keynotes: https://blog.docker.com/2016/06/dockercon-general-session-vi... Guest speakers for the last (second) general keynote were: -Guest speaker #1: Docker and Microsoft demo by Mark Russinovich, CTO Microsoft Azure -Guest speaker #2: Docker at ADP by Keith Fulton, CTO, ADP And just somehow I sense that the parent poster isn'…

> (What makes the objection doubly silly is that Mark Russinovich isn't the usual corporate drone one might expect. He's the guy who did the Sysinternals tools and several editions of the "Windows Internals" reference on the architecture of the Windows OS.) From Sysinternals to the Azure CTO... what a weird transition. That guy has had an interesting career.

Yep, same reaction. Russinovich is not only amazing but also a good guy.
Post reply on HN