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

Docker is deleting Open Source organisations - what you need to know

blog.alexellis.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 764 posts

Re: Docker is deleting Open Source organisations - what you need to know

#291

Post by boredumb »

darkwater wrote: post #229
voytec wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Docker should have been a neat tool made by one enthusiast, just like curl is. I have nothing but mad respect for Daniel Stenberg. 25 years of development of great software, for which he had been threatened[1] and had ridiculous US travel visa obtaining issues[2]. [1] https://daniel.haxx.se/blog/2021/02/19/i-will-slaughter-you/ [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26192025 [2] https://daniel.haxx.se/blog/2020/1…

> [1] https://daniel.haxx.se/blog/2021/02/19/i-will-slaughter-you/ Wow that's clearly someone with serious mental issues :( I hope he could find some help for his condition.

In the pdf there's mention to terry davis so I'm tempted to think this is actually a bit of a troll.

Re: Docker is deleting Open Source organisations - what you need to know

#292

Post by nine_k »

maccard wrote: post #199
mfer wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Getting out of a self inflicted problem isn't so easy. They have spent a long time trying. For example, putting distribution in the CNCF, working with the OCI on specs (like the distribution spec), making it possible to use other registries while not breaking the workflows for existing folks, and even some cases of working with other registries (e.g., their MCR integration with Docker Hub that offloads some egress an…

It's a self inflicted problem they've doubled down on, though, and that self inflicted problem is also the reason for their success. If docker hub could be removed in a config, the value add of docker the company is significantly diminished. It's hard to feel sorry for a company who actively pursued lock-in, and didn't make any real attempts at avoiding it (you know what would help? A setting to not use docker hub, o…

I fail to follow. If DockerHub is the part that actively burns money, why stick with it? If, say, Docker Desktop is the part that actively brings profits, why would it be afflicted if the users used a different image registry? Most companies, except the smallest ones, use their own registry / mirror anyway.

Even better, the registry may continue to exist, but would (eventually) stop storing the images, and start storing .torrent files for the actual downloads. Seeing an image from the GitHub release page would be enough for most smaller projects (yes, BT supports HTTP mirrors directly).

Re: Docker is deleting Open Source organisations - what you need to know

#293

Post by Kinrany »

pmarreck wrote: post #60
jon-wood wrote: post #13

Docker the tool has been a massive benefit to software development, every now and then I have a moan about the hassle of getting something bootstrapped to run on Docker, but it's still worlds better than the old ways of managing dependencies and making sure everyone on a project is aligned on what versions of things are installed. Unfortunately Docker the company appears to be dying, this is the latest in a long line…

> worlds better than the old ways of managing dependencies and making sure everyone on a project is aligned on what versions of things are installed. And Nix is worlds better than even this . Imagine!

Does Nix have an equivalent of docker-compose yet?

nix-shell is amazing for installing binaries, but actually wiring up and running the services doesn't seem like a solved problem.

Unless Nix expects a separate tool to do this once binaries are installed, of course.

Re: Docker is deleting Open Source organisations - what you need to know

#294

Post by yamtaddle »

justinclift wrote: post #172
raesene9 wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is more about Docker hub than Docker. Image hosting is expensive at scale, and someone's got to pay for the compute/storage/network...

While that's true, for the amount of network traffic they're likely moving around, I wonder where they're placing their servers. eg something like AWS with massive data transfer costs, vs something else like carefully placed dedicated/colocation servers at places which don't charge for bandwidth

If it's AWS, they've surely got a huge discount. No way they're paying 8+x normal big-fish CDN rates for transfer. At their scale, it would have easily been worth the effort to move to something cheaper than AWS long ago, or else to negotiate a far lower rate.

Re: Docker is deleting Open Source organisations - what you need to know

#295

Post by mardifoufs »

tyingq wrote: post #203
timcobb wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can’t have positive earnings like Docker if you sell 5 for 4

I'm assuming creative calculations. Like Uber's idea of "earnings" changed when they went public.

Based on what? How is that more likely than just them being able to finally generate revenue, considering they started focusing on that a few years ago? I don't get your comment at all

Re: Docker is deleting Open Source organisations - what you need to know

#296

Post by creshal »

mysterydip wrote: post #260
dbingham wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, that involves ripping out Docker Hub everywhere. It's a significant chunk of work, not something easily fit into 30 days on a team that is already strapped for resources with more work than we can do.

I'm not familiar with how Docker works, so forgive the ignorance. I thought the point of docker images was portability? Is it not just taking the references and pointing to a new instance under your control?

I'm not too familiar with docker myself, but gitlab's selfhosted omnibus includes a container registry that Just Works™ for our small team.

Re: Docker is deleting Open Source organisations - what you need to know

#297

Post by djbusby »

Faaak wrote: post #277
dbingham wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, that involves ripping out Docker Hub everywhere. It's a significant chunk of work, not something easily fit into 30 days on a team that is already strapped for resources with more work than we can do.

Setting up harbor as a docker proxy-cache is actually quite simple

The link https://goharbor.io/docs/2.1.0/administration/configure-prox...

Re: Docker is deleting Open Source organisations - what you need to know

#298

Post by worksonmine »

phkahler wrote: post #106
raesene9 wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is more about Docker hub than Docker. Image hosting is expensive at scale, and someone's got to pay for the compute/storage/network...

>> Image hosting is expensive at scale, and someone's got to pay for the compute/storage/network.. Bit Torrent would beg to differ.

Not a bad idea. Have the users seed the cached images.

Re: Docker is deleting Open Source organisations - what you need to know

#299

Post by Clubber »

shubb wrote: post #168
voytec wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Docker should have been a neat tool made by one enthusiast, just like curl is. I have nothing but mad respect for Daniel Stenberg. 25 years of development of great software, for which he had been threatened[1] and had ridiculous US travel visa obtaining issues[2]. [1] https://daniel.haxx.se/blog/2021/02/19/i-will-slaughter-you/ [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26192025 [2] https://daniel.haxx.se/blog/2020/1…

Replying to child I can't reply to? There was a period where the US was treating public key encryption like arms exports, and involved in spreading the technology outside the US as tools were in us.govs sht list

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phil_Zimmermann

After a report from RSA Security, who were in a licensing dispute with regard to the use of the RSA algorithm in PGP, the United States Customs Service started a criminal investigation of Zimmermann, for allegedly violating the Arms Export Control Act.[5] The United States Government had long regarded cryptographic software as a munition, and thus subject to arms trafficking export controls. At that time, PGP was considered to be impermissible ("high-strength") for export from the United States. The maximum strength allowed for legal export has since been raised and now allows PGP to be exported. The investigation lasted three years, but was finally dropped without filing charges after MIT Press published the source code of PGP

They tried to ruin the man.

Re: Docker is deleting Open Source organisations - what you need to know

#300

Post by ohgodplsno »

mynameisvlad wrote: post #287
ohgodplsno wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And a sudden fire is also unplanned work, but that's still your work. If this is such a threat, then maybe shift priorities around.

Are we not allowed to complain about unnecessary unplanned work being foisted on us with 30 days notice? That seems like an entirely relevant complaint for this forum but from your first reply, you’re acting like somehow it’s the greatest offense in the world that someone pointed this out.

Come on, 30 days notice is a walk in the park. Additionally, OP was the one complaining that changing a few URLs and eventually spinning up a new server. It's quite literally a one day or two job, unless you're at a company the size of Amazon (in which case, luckily for you, you're not the only SRE, so it's still just a few days).

> The best I can come up with, at the moment, is waiting for each organization to make some sort of announcement with one of "We've paid, don't worry", "We're migrating, here's where", or "We've applied to the open source program". And if organizations don't do that... I mean, 30 days isn't enough time to find alternatives and migrate.

This is the original comment. The best they can come up with is... do nothing and wait to see if the smoke turns into a fire ? I've seen better uses of time. 30 days is enough time to find an alternative, migrate _and_ get regular coffee breaks too.

Post reply on HN