181–190 of 220 posts
Here is a list of free Git hosting services for open source software: • https://github.com/ • https://gitlab.com/ • https://bitbucket.org/ • https://codeberg.org/ (As per the linked article) • https://sr.ht/ (Sourcehut) Codeberg and Sourcehut appear to use open source code for their web page backend; the others seem to use proprietary software (in the case of GitLab, there is a free version, but gitlab.com also uses…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is Drew's position: https://paste.sr.ht/~sircmpwn/78cc21e1661d5a9d8038f47e532d28...
Pretty feeble argument. Basically it boils down to "if you use Docker you risk not learning how it works and hurting yourself." As I mention in the sibling comment, it would feel less patronising just saying out loud "we do not like containers, roll your own."
I was researching Keycloak integration with Kubernetes (a project needed it at the office).
I installed it on bare metal, set-up its TLS certificates and enabled native HTTPS. While searching for integration I found a video. The person installed Keycloak Docker image, and dropped an HTTPS proxy container in front of it to enable TLS/HTTPS.
If this is not both bad practice and being misinformed about Keycloak in one step, I don't know what it is.
The person didn't learn how to use and administer Keycloak, didn't make good judgement calls about security and published bad information while doing that.
Docker is easy to abuse and creates people who think know stuff, but do not in reality.
Docker. Pull Responsibly (TM).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This will probably be a corporate-circlejerc like GAIA-X again. The website is just bad at explaining what's going on. It reads like an academic paper and is not user friendly at all. Do you have any experience with that?
Looks like a bunch of cryptocurrency/blockchain people scooping up government funds: https://essif-lab.github.io/framework/docs/ssi-standards This could be the real start of web3, but I'm pessimistic about the way most of the homepage is talking about funding more than about the problem being solved. The rest reads like a whitepaper. Maybe blockchains are the right technology here (though I doubt it) but the people w…
Which sounds like every EU funded project I know. That's the state of state-driven tech innovation here, very nice. Happy to pay taxes for that sh*t ...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Pretty feeble argument. Basically it boils down to "if you use Docker you risk not learning how it works and hurting yourself." As I mention in the sibling comment, it would feel less patronising just saying out loud "we do not like containers, roll your own."
I don't think so. I was researching Keycloak integration with Kubernetes (a project needed it at the office). I installed it on bare metal, set-up its TLS certificates and enabled native HTTPS. While searching for integration I found a video. The person installed Keycloak Docker image, and dropped an HTTPS proxy container in front of it to enable TLS/HTTPS. If this is not both bad practice and being misinformed about…
Listen, I understand not liking containers. That's fine. But just say so, or try to give more concrete arguments to the table than "I saw a guy in a video creating an insecure container. Thus Docker creates ignorance."
As if configuring servers by hand isn't prone to misconfiguration or bad security practices. Perhaps we have namespaces today because people have been creating insecure, unmaintainable pet systems since the stone age, yet it doesn't save you from hurting yourself if you don't know what you're doing.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think so. I was researching Keycloak integration with Kubernetes (a project needed it at the office). I installed it on bare metal, set-up its TLS certificates and enabled native HTTPS. While searching for integration I found a video. The person installed Keycloak Docker image, and dropped an HTTPS proxy container in front of it to enable TLS/HTTPS. If this is not both bad practice and being misinformed about…
Oh, so there's people that don't know how to use containers, so they're bad? What kind of patronising, nanny state kind of argument is that? Listen, I understand not liking containers. That's fine. But just say so, or try to give more concrete arguments to the table than "I saw a guy in a video creating an insecure container. Thus Docker creates ignorance." As if configuring servers by hand isn't prone to misconfigur…
You're building rest of your comment on this misinterpretation of my comment.
What I say is "Docker is easy, but it lowers the bar for making mistakes too much. Using Docker without enough information creates bigger problems, faster".
You can do a lot of mistakes, and fatal ones at that, while working on bare metal too. I'm managing systems for 15+ years, using Linux close to 20, and had my fair share on any abstraction level (metal, VM, container, etc.).
However, K8S and Docker is susceptible to create a whole set of problems, and more importantly without knowing it, until it's too late. VMs and bare metal fail relatively early and with more noise. If you do something wrong with your K8S deployment, you can't mend it, and need to re-deploy it.
I do not prefer Docker and K8S, and avoid the latter if I can, but I'm not an hard-line extremist against any of them. I also manage containers and a K8S cluster at work, too.
And no, I never patronize anyone. This is not my style. I just shared my experience, and told that "learning wrong things is easier with Docker", that's all.
I know excellent developers and sysadmins who do wonders with containers, too. Docker and K8S are sharp knives with no warnings on them. That's all.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is it just me or does this seem to only support Linux and leave all other platforms out to dry?
here in the USA, Apple and Microsoft repeatedly lock out Linux|*nix from interoperability, marketing, transparency and more .. Linux Foundation appears to be a marketing club for Fortune 500.. where is this perspective ? You developers must include proprietary duopoly in any "open" effort but wait at the back door until I return and tell you what I want to ?
And I'm not saying that not supporting yet is a problem, but the docs saying "everything happens in Docker" implies a lack of forward-thinking in the design of the system that wholly excludes working elsewhere (including FreeBSD or other FOSS platforms).
Apparently it is being supported, but the docs will need some clarification now that some of the advertised assumptions are no longer going to be true.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't see any docs about that. How is the `image` value used on macOS and expected to contain some usable macOS filesystem layout? Are you expected to SSH to a machine running the target platform from a Docker container and run the commands that way?
Yeah the docs are lacking. The way Woodpecker works is, there is a Server , that is sort of the "manager"; you only run one of these. You run one Agent on each host that you want builds to happen on. The Agent then executes the steps of your Pipeline on a "platform", which is an Agent running on a particular OS. By default an Agent just wants to execute jobs in a Docker container, using the docker backend. But there…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Fun fact, they're literally backed by the Chinese government who are trying to promote open source, I assume because it can't be embargoed. On the bright side I suppose that means they shouldn't have any of those pesky commercial pressures to start charging people. I don't think I need to say what the down sides are.
>"Fun fact, they're literally backed by the Chinese government who are trying to promote open source, I assume because it can't be embargoed." And then the feds come for you for breaking some of those US sanctions you had no idea about.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think we should emphasize that Sourcehut is just currently free while it is in alpha. Mr. DeVault been very upfront about the fact that he's planning to start charging eventually. From his FAQ, https://man.sr.ht/billing-faq.md#why-should-i-pay-when-githu... The point is to set up a responsible financial situation between himself and the users and avoid the bad incentive structures that "free" services have ("Free"…
Does SourceHut still have an aversion to Kubernetes and Docker? Last year I was trying to setup SourceHut on my home infra (which is Docker/SystemD based, but was Kubernetes based) and I was told I'd be banned if I asked about it, and that they don't support that kind of software. Super weird interaction from someone I otherwise used to admire.