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

671–680 of 764 posts

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

#671

Post by Zetice »

jehb wrote: post #642
Zetice wrote: post #415

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you're unable to take on a task that has a 30 day deadline in your org, regardless of size, you're experiencing a good amount of bloat.

You're absolutely right! But bloat is also incredibly common, especially when "task" in this case might describe "multi-team project." Can it get done in 30 days? Of course! Might you already have dozens of high-priority projects to deliver in the next 30 days with stakeholders screaming at you every day for updates? Absolutely!

You should read The Phoenix Project to understand that "have dozens of high-priority projects to deliver in the next 30 days" is a consequence of poor management, not a given even for large organizations.

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

#672

Post by windexh8er »

freedomben wrote: post #289
dralley wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OTOH, Docker didn't want to support a lot of features that enterprise customers wanted, like self-hosted private registries, because they wanted people using Dockerhub. And wasn't the runtime problems because Docker was very very late to adopting CGroups v2?

Yes exactly. GP is misinformed on history. Red hat didn't sabotage anything. Docker took forever to update to cgroups V2, and that broke it for distros like fedora that are up to date. The user had to downgrade their kernel in order to use docker, but if they did everything else worked fine.

While you have a valid point with cgroups I never stated anything about "sabotage". So let's not play the misinformed card and then go on making things up.

As for Red Hat and their games of not supporting Docker, even after cgroups were addressed Red Hat never officially supported Docker as a runtime. How do I know this? Because at the time I was working with paying clients of RHEL/OpenShift and was on calls regarding said customers being forced to use inferior (their words) RHEL tooling. So while your history may have not seen the games Red Hat was playing, they surely were.

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

#673

Post by osigurdson »

coxley wrote: post #540
nickstinemates wrote: post #516

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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)

Yes, podman has the tooling - identical cli in fact for the most part. alias docker=podman works fine for most things.

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

#674

Post by osigurdson »

wongarsu wrote: post #165
osigurdson wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd like to see Docker succeed. They invented / formalized the space and deserve credit for that. They are probably doing the right thing with some of their development tooling (though maybe that should just be spun off to Microsoft) and ensuring images do not contain badware is something companies will pay for. However, their core offering must be the leader if they want to survive. Devs must want to use "docker run…

> their core offering must be the leader if they want to survive. Devs must want to use "docker run" instead of "podman run" If their core offering is container hosting, they should be able to make a company out of that even without the client. After all jfrog and cloudsmith are more per less just that, as is github.

Docker's core offering is docker (obviously), but that doesn't have to be the piece that is monetized.

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

#675

Post by rodgerd »

Wowfunhappy wrote: post #509
legohead wrote: post #395

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"don't expect" or "for certain"? Can't really plan ahead without some kind of certainty.

Unless you're hosting the infrastructure yourself, you can't ever be certain. No one can know for sure what Docker will decide to do in the future. The entire company could shut down tomorrow. But it seems to me that Docker official images are no more at risk of deletion today than they were a week ago.

> Unless you're hosting the infrastructure yourself, you can't ever be certain.

I can't be certain I won't be hit by a car, or a storm won't rip up the fibre to my house, or a raft of other things, either.

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

#676

Post by ehutch79 »

anonymoushn wrote: post #102
tyingq wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course, I can do a lot of record revenue and earnings selling five dollar bills for $4. I'm curious what a path to profit would look like...is this kind of squeeze the only way to get there?

that would make you negative one dollar of earnings per sale

But 4$ of revenue! Do that 1000x and think of the growth!

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

#677

Post by asda_ »

mc4ndr3 wrote: post #410
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…

That's a fair point, and when someone with a working brain mentions the fallout throughout the Internet that would result, I expect Docker Inc. will reverse course and embark on a PR campaign pretending it was all a mere tawdry joke.

[dead]

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

#678

Post by notatoad »

cpitman wrote: post #412
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…

Many of the responses here are talking about how to vendor/cache images instead of depending on an online registry, but remember that you also need access to a supply chain for these images. Base images will continue to be patched/updated, and you need those to keep your own images up to date. Unless the suggestion is to build all images, from the bottom up, from scratch.

>Unless the suggestion is to build all images, from the bottom up, from scratch.

this doesn't really seem like an unreasonable suggestion.

just change your build process to pull from the source repository (almost always linked from the docker hub page) instead and eliminate one level of dependency from the chain. in an ideal world, docker hub would have been a more stable buffer inbetween the original source of the image and you, but as long as they are proving to be more of a liability than a source of stability, just cut them out.

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

#679

Post by notatoad »

hellodanylo wrote: post #445
nine_k wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good thing is that setting up an image registry in AWS is so simple! (Ha-ha, only serious.)

There is also ECR Public Gallery, which mirrors many public images from DockerHub. https://gallery.ecr.aws

or more specifically, https://gallery.ecr.aws/docker

for any "official" image you're pulling from docker hub, just prefix it with "public.ecr.aws/docker/library/" to pull from ecr instead

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

#680

Post by notatoad »

raesene9 wrote: post #73
spicyusername wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

ideally a coop of some variety This is the role I feel like podman, the tool developed by Red Hat, is filling.

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 not that expensive at scale. i can put an image on ECR and pay for bandwidth and storage at what is really not very good rates, and it still comes out way cheaper than paying for what docker hub wants me to pay.
Post reply on HN