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

721–730 of 764 posts

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

#721

Post by vilunov »

ParetoOptimal wrote: post #657
vilunov wrote: post #288

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Makes perfect sense to me, sadly. The dependencies are specified in excessively, that's why everyone is shipping Ubuntu. This is caused by and further facilitates the development style of "do not track what we use, just ship everything". Also, the dependencies are specified in container images, which themselves are derivative artifacts and not the original source code, and these dependencies often change in different…

> Most importantly, nix is incredibly invasive in development process, adopting it requires heavy time investments. Typically yes, but Nix actually allows you to be less pure to save time and pick your most economic point on the reproducibility continuum. I'm fairly sure there was an article about this... ah here it is: https://www.haskellforall.com/2022/08/incrementally-package-...

This isn't what I was talking about, I'm all for being as pure as possible, dial the reproducibility and isolation to the max. Unfortunately, Nix itself as an application is not isolated. It requires a unique installation process to be available for users, because it wants to manage its store at the root level (/nix/store/), but I hear the situation is different on macOS. Applications packaged with Nix also require special treatment to run in Nix environment, with paths rewritten and binaries patched to support Nix filesystem structure instead of the traditional Linux one.

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

#722

Post by KronisLV »

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…

> Secondly, if this is a serious worry. I would recommend creating your own private docker registry.

I've personally been using Sonatype Nexus for a few years with no issues - both for caching external images, as well as hosting my own custom ones. It has pretty good permissions management and cleanup policies.

Here's more info: https://blog.kronis.dev/tutorials/moving-from-gitlab-registr...

Edit: here's a link to the site of the product directly as well, in case anyone is interested in the self-hosted option: https://www.sonatype.com/products/nexus-repository

It's probably not for everyone, but only having to pay for the VPS (or host things on my homelab) feels both simpler and more cost effective in my case. I've also used it at work and there were very few issues across the years with it, mostly due to underestimating how much storage would be needed (e.g. going with 40 GB of storage for approx. 10 apps, each of which were in active development).

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

#723

Post by al_be_back »

sadly, cloud providers (GCE, AWS etc) make it too convenient and cheap to host/manage container/package registries. You also have github, gitlab offering similar services, free or cheap, eating further into Docker's market.

I don't see how they can offer Free accounts to Orgs unless they've a steady-growing paying-customer base to offset running costs.

Unless they massively restrict team size, image size, number of projects, throttle connections - costs would spiral out of control.

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

#724

Post by anecdotal1 »

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…

What's so hard about making your team build and host the images you rely on?

Install Gitlab, clone these projects onto it, it will usually detect and build the container images. You may have to manually fire off builds for older tags/branches but it will work

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

#725

Post by jehb »

Zetice wrote: post #671
jehb wrote: post #642

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I've read TPP. What I'm saying is, most companies are Parts Unlimited before their awakening and a lot of us are Brent. I think the reason that book resonated so well the dysfunction described there is a lived reality for most IT workers.

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

#726

Post by Zak »

wpietri wrote: post #383
voytec wrote: post #249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People suffering from psychosis can create "facts" supporting their ideas and believe in them. Usually it's the stuff like "someone follows me", "someone wants to hurt me". Psychosis is the entry point to schizophrenia which is more or less, an illness in which brain makes stuff up and the ill person cannot differentiate facts from hallucinations. Possibly there was no defense contract at all.

It's not just people suffering from psychosis who do that. "29% believe aliens exist and 21% believe a UFO crashed at Roswell in 1947. [...] 5% of respondents believe that Paul McCartney died and was secretly replaced in the Beatles in 1966, and just 4% believe shape-shifting reptilian people control our world by taking on human form and gaining power. 7% of voters think the moon landing was fake." -- https://www.pub…

I'm surprised aliens is the low one here. The exact question is "Do you believe aliens exist, or not?", not something more specific like little green men in flying saucers abducting cows.

The universe is large. In the tiny slice we can observe well enough to draw conclusions, Wikipedia currently lists 62 "potentially habitable exoplanets". I'd be much more surprised by intelligent life being unique to Earth than by there being many planets harboring intelligent life, or to answer the question as asked: I believe aliens exist.

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

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

#727

Post by white_dragon88 »

phaedrus wrote: post #581
caeril wrote: post #572

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This whole thing is so weird. Why do so many organizations depend on the internet to function? It wasn't too long ago that it was standard practice to vendor your dependencies; that is, dump your dependencies into a vendor/ directory and keep that directory updated and backed up. But now, you all think it's 100% acceptable to just throw your hands up if github is down, or a maven repository is down, or docker hub mak…

There are some places that still work the old way, such as where I work - and we're finding we're increasingly out-of-touch with younger developers who grew up in a connected world. We had a recent college grad engineer (developer) who didn't work out as a hire. Some examples of the disconnect: Try as I might, I couldn't get him to understand the difference between "git" the tool and "Github" the website. He kept mak…

[dead]

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

#728

Post by TeeMassive »

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…

And this is why in many organizations I insist on mirroring every packages and images that we depend on.

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

#730

Post by pmarreck »

poolopolopolo wrote: post #530
pmarreck wrote: post #519

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> except you cant deploy Nix files NixOps and nix-deploy: EXIST! https://arista.my.site.com/AristaCommunity/s/article/Deploy-... > better be sure that every employee is using Nix and have the same configuration. The whole point of docker is to make reproducible builds everywhere, not just your computer. lol, "tell me you never used Nix without telling me you never used Nix" because it literally guarantees that , each…

First you are tightly coupling your CI to your developers machine, that in itself is already a pretty bad idea. Second, if one employee wants to install htop on their machine, then every employee will have to install it, this can quickly become a problem when you have 500+ developers. Third, I think you missed the first part on the second quote, you are FORCING every developer to not only use linux but also to use on…

> First you are tightly coupling your CI to your developers machine

It's not like you can't configure builds differently based on an ENV variable, which is exactly what most build tools already do.

> Second, if one employee wants to install htop on their machine, then every employee will have to install it

There's actually a way to install things on the fly on first use. That way, if you never use it, it will never install. If you use it more than once, it will use the locally-cached version. Next?

> this can quickly become a problem when you have 500+ developers.

Nope. Already answered. Plus, you can allow some things into the "pure" environment if you wish. Harmless things like btop or htop, for example.

> Third, I think you missed the first part on the second quote, you are FORCING every developer

What part of "everyone has to use slow-ass non-deterministically-building Docker" is NOT "FORCING" every developer to use something? LOLOL. Plus, on Macs (which USED to be my preferred dev machine) it's slow as fuck, which is why I had to switch to a linux laptop anyway, which is why I said "fuck this" and installed NixOS and went to town instead.

> to not only use linux but also to use one distribution that is pretty niche.

First of all, wow, you are naïve. No good thing DID NOT start out "niche". Literally every technology I've gotten into except for ASP.CRAP was "niche" when I got into it- from Ruby, to Postgres, to Elixir, to Jquery (at the time)... Do not judge things based on their popularity because that's the Appeal to Popularity fallacy. Judge things based on their promise, young padawan. And Nix... promises much.

Post reply on HN