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

531–540 of 764 posts

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

#531

Post by owaislone »

dbingham wrote: post #230

As an SRE Manager, this is causing me a hell of a headache this morning. In 30 days a bunch of images we depend on may just disappear. We mostly depend on images from relatively large organizations (`alpine`, `node`, `golang`, etc), so one would want to believe that we'll be fine - they're all either in the open source program or will pay. But I can't hang my hat on that. If those images disappear, we lose the abilit…

Good time/opportunity to get your team/company to invest in a registry+proxy to host all images you depend on.

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

#533

Post by amouat »

dbingham wrote: post #230

As an SRE Manager, this is causing me a hell of a headache this morning. In 30 days a bunch of images we depend on may just disappear. We mostly depend on images from relatively large organizations (`alpine`, `node`, `golang`, etc), so one would want to believe that we'll be fine - they're all either in the open source program or will pay. But I can't hang my hat on that. If those images disappear, we lose the abilit…

Just to be clear, the official images are definitely not at risk, and I say that as a Docker captain.

Official images are hugely important to Docker, now and going forward.

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

#534

Post by jehb »

bryanlarsen wrote: post #140
wvh wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In all fairness, curl is purely a software tool. Docker is arguably more like a service. As such, it creates costs for and direct dependency on the entity behind it.

Docker is a software tool. Docker Hub is a service. If Docker didn't stand up Docker Hub the equivalent services from GitHub, Google et al would have competed on a more even playing field.

It's almost like they created intentional ambiguity here when they renamed the company (dotCloud) to match the name of the open source tool, then renamed the open source project behind the tool to something else (Moby), but kept it for the command line tool, while also combining the name Docker into their product offerings, including Engine and Deskop, that handle completely different parts of managing containers. That's not even including registries, dockerfiles, Compose, Swarm, etc. and the ambiguity around where those sit in the a Venn diagram.

That's some Google-level naming strategy there.

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

#535

Post by manquer »

sirius87 wrote: post #166
roydivision wrote: post #145

Docker should never have become a business. There’s virtually nothing there to make a business around, it’s a suite of useful utilities that should have remained a simple open source project. I switched to podman a while ago and haven’t looked back.

Docker Hub does host images running into several GBs for even small hobby projects, and they also bear network transfer costs. Even with podman, you're going to have to host your images somewhere, right? Right now, the internet infrastructure heavily relies on the good graces of Microsoft (Github, npm), and storage space and network transfer charges are taken for granted.

The design of docker distribution is poor because the company backing it wants to retain control .

Torrent based distribution for open source projects and other public initiatives were there long before docker .

Apt mirroring has also been there for a long long time . Checksum integrity verification of mirrors have well established workflows .

We don’t need good graces of any company to distribute assets .

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

#536

Post by kobalsky »

voytec wrote: post #283
pshirshov wrote: post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe that B1/B2 should work just fine for these purposes. Probably you answered an officer (or airline worker) that you were gonna "work" there, not just visit your employer for an event?

Absolutely not. I had, and still have, my own small business in Poland and I was clear (in writing) that I am planning to visit my main client.

You mentioned both employer and client, are they the same?

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

#537

Post by ijaeifjzdi »

r3trohack3r wrote: post #237
FlyingSnake wrote: post #31

> Start publishing images to GitHub And when GitHub starts similar shenanigans, move out to where? I am old enough to know the we can't trust BigTech and their unpredictable behaviors. Eventually we need to start a Codeberg like alternative using Prototype funds to be self reliant. 1: https://codeberg.org/ 2: https://prototypefund.de/

The economics of hosting an image registry are tough. Just mirroring the npm registry can cost $100s per month in storage for tiny little tarballs. Hosting GB images in an append-only registry, some of which get published weekly or even daily, will burn an incredible amount of money in storage costs. And that’s before talking about ingress and egress. There will also be a tonne of engineering costs for managing it, e…

you just have to host the recipe and the hash/meta-data

c'mon. This is not amateur hour. Hosting the whole thing only made sense for docker because their plan was always to do this microsoft style play.

If you assume you are either open source or fully closed enterprises, the problem is very, very easy to solve. and cheap. Just relinquish full control of being able to close all the doors for a fee, like they are doing now.

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

#538

Post by ijaeifjzdi »

0xDEF wrote: post #451
hospitalJail wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The dev model of "we've lost track of our dependencies so ship Ubuntu and a load of state" never sat well. This was my first thought when I learned of Docker. I have a hard time calling myself an 'Engineer' when there are so many unknowns, that I'm merely playing around until something works. I insist on being called a Programmer. It pays better than 'real' engineering. Why not embrace it? (Credit toward safety crit…

I doubt the real™ engineers at NASA and SpaceX know everything their proprietary closed-source Matlab-to-FPGA tooling is actually doing under the hood.

can't say for spaceX, but most NASA glue is built in house. close to zero proprietary ones.

maybe the vlsi is closed. but that is "industry standard" i guess. rest is a bunch of mathy-language du jour held together with python or something.

...opaque docker containers going to prod doesn't have a excuse other than inefficient orgs fulled by VC or Ad money. Or maybe they do, but you won't excuse them using NASA as an example :)

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

#539

Post by the_jeremy »

softfalcon wrote: post #355
dbingham wrote: post #230

As an SRE Manager, this is causing me a hell of a headache this morning. In 30 days a bunch of images we depend on may just disappear. We mostly depend on images from relatively large organizations (`alpine`, `node`, `golang`, etc), so one would want to believe that we'll be fine - they're all either in the open source program or will pay. But I can't hang my hat on that. If those images disappear, we lose the abilit…

First of all, want to say, that sounds deeply frustrating. Secondly, if this is a serious worry. I would recommend creating your own private docker registry. https://docs.docker.com/registry/deploying/ Then I would download all current versions of the images you use within your org and push them up to said registry. It’s not a perfect solution, but you’ll be able to pull the images if they disappear and considering t…

I would not recommend doing it through Docker, though, especially after this change. We use AWS's ECR, and you can set it to do pull-through caching of public images, so images you've already used will stick around even if Docker blows up, and you don't have to pull the images yourself, you just point everything in your environment to ECR and ~~ECR will pull from docker hub~~ (EDIT: it only supports quay.io, not docker hub) and start building its cache as you use the images.

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

#540

Post by coxley »

nickstinemates wrote: post #516
gorjusborg wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'd like to see Docker succeed. They invented / formalized the space and deserve credit for that. If by succeed, you mean they deserve to have revenue, I disagree. They spun some cool work out of dotCloud when it failed. They seemed to delay thinking about how they'd monetize the work, and sort of fell into charging for developer tooling after their orchestration play lost to kubernetes. At this point, I think of D…

Time for a https://github.com/google/lmctfy revival.

I mean, OCI and containerd exist. You can have "Docker" containers without the Docker just fine. Just need to replace the user tooling, which I assume podman does? (never used it)
Post reply on HN