Can't I contribute with my $10? I'll use it personally.
Flynn - Open Source PaaS powered by Docker
81–90 of 155 posts
Re: Flynn - Open Source PaaS powered by Docker
#82Earlier quoted context omitted.
Flynn is particularly appealing to companies that need to completely control their own infrastructure. In the same sense that git being open source helps, not hurts github, I think there's limited crossover between the users of Flynn and DotCloud customers.
Who in their right mind would pay $0.288 per hour (a little over $200 per month) to dotCloud for roughly the equivalent of an EC2 small instance, when with just a little extra time spent up front, they'll be able to fire up an AMI of Flynn and pay less than a quarter as much per month?
> Who in their right mind would pay $0.288 per hour (a little over $200 per month) to dotCloud for roughly the equivalent of an EC2 small instance, when with just a little extra time spent up front, they'll be able to fire up an AMI of Flynn and pay less than a quarter as much per month?
People who value a little extra effort at startup as being a cost that is more than $200/month over the life of their use of dotCloud.
There's a lot of cases where that could be true, especially if the extra effort and moving to a different platform is deferred, rather than permanent. There are many times where doing something now (that isn't necessary for immediate goals, but is useful for long-term savings) has greater opportunity costs than doing it later. (Lots of times when the reverse is true, as well.)
Re: Flynn - Open Source PaaS powered by Docker
#83Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, Docker is moving quickly but one barrier to resolving this is philosophical: static IPs and private networks are un-Dockerish. Right now it's not obvious what a clean solution would look like. I'd be keen to see how Flynn's discovery and routing develops, it sounds very promising.
Static IPs and private networks are not particularly un-Dockerish. They are just not the default implemented by Docker :) Docker 1.0 will include an API which will make it much easier to customize how you want networking to happen. That includes static IPs and private networks. Note that the 1.0 API will also include hooks for service discovery - specifically to facilitate the development of projects like Flynn.
Are these feature plans documented somewhere? Private networks, in the spirit of EC2 security groups or VPCs, would help simplify many distributed computing scenarios where securing services with passwords isn't an option.
Re: Flynn - Open Source PaaS powered by Docker
#84Earlier quoted context omitted.
Flynn is particularly appealing to companies that need to completely control their own infrastructure. In the same sense that git being open source helps, not hurts github, I think there's limited crossover between the users of Flynn and DotCloud customers.
Not sure I completely agree with this. I don't know what your internal discussions were, but at least one of your competitors has an 'enterprise' option in which they give you your own version of the toolkit. Sadly among this was that they stopped with their open-source contributions to the Cloud Foundry community (Their last update appears to have been over two years ago https://github.com/cloudfoundry/vcap/pull/105…
Selling an on-premise "Enterprise PaaS" is one of the ways Red Hat is monetizing OpenShift.
Re: Flynn - Open Source PaaS powered by Docker
#85"Unlike existing open source PaaS products, Flynn focuses on providing a set of modular components that can be replaced and reused." I wonder if there is anyone here who works on CloudFoundry or OpenShift and could comment on this, or comment on the proposed capabilities of Flynn ( https://github.com/flynn/flynn-spec ) compared to the capabilities of their systems.
Well I can say that the closest alternative to this would be Cloud Foundry. Their Warden system is what manages the containers: https://github.com/cloudfoundry/warden/tree/master/warden They actually don't use LXC though and implement resource control with Cgroups. That said, Cloud Foundry is extremely difficult to get setup and running in my experience (even with the v2.0 recently released). It sounds like one big d…
+1 on the fact CF installation is tough! They recently releases a suite of scripts to help installing it on AWS. Forget about installing it manually on Open Stack (talking from experience). I can only hope Flynn gets the easy install right, so people will be able to try it out.
CF is actually very plugable as well - there is a well defined internal API, which you could just add components that listens/publishes to - however, I don't think its encouraged, neither have I seen a single example of it.
Re: Flynn - Open Source PaaS powered by Docker
#86This is great guys, good to see more people bringing PaaS-like workflow without the baggage. We've been working in this space with Juju (http://juju.ubuntu.com) but we're using standard LXC for containers.
Using LXC allows us to support applications that run on multiple processes, and since Juju is also written in Go, It seems like it might be possible for us to work together in some interesting ways.
We already have charms for Rack, node.js, Django, etc. already working and we can replicate the example in the video, just on raw LXC, EC2, and OpenStack. And we’ve put a lot of time and energy into managing the relationships between services, which is the big complicated part of a PaaS So, there seems to be pretty good overlap.
Have you looked at Juju? Perhaps there are places where you can leverage the heavy lifting that the juju team has already done in creating a “bring your own” kind of PaaS.
Re: Flynn - Open Source PaaS powered by Docker
#87I wanted to contribute but I am a single freelance developer, I don't have the amount of money shown on the sponsorship options. I would be great to have a USD 50 option there.
Thanks-- we definitely plan to explore ways for individuals to support the project.
If open source projects had always required $50,000+ to get started, we might not have GNU/Linux today.
Why can't you start the project first and then ask for donations later? Are you saying that unless you guys get paid you're not going to work on the project?
Re: Flynn - Open Source PaaS powered by Docker
#88This is great guys, good to see more people bringing PaaS-like workflow without the baggage. We've been working in this space with Juju ( http://juju.ubuntu.com ) but we're using standard LXC for containers. Using LXC allows us to support applications that run on multiple processes, and since Juju is also written in Go, It seems like it might be possible for us to work together in some interesting ways. We already ha…
I really liked Juju. I think we operate on slightly different paradigms / abstractions. Would love to talk more though.
Re: Flynn - Open Source PaaS powered by Docker
#89Earlier quoted context omitted.
Thanks-- we definitely plan to explore ways for individuals to support the project.
If open source projects had always required $50,000+ to get started, we might not have GNU/Linux today. Why can't you start the project first and then ask for donations later? Are you saying that unless you guys get paid you're not going to work on the project?
You will not nearly get as much money if you ask for donations later. Certainly not enough to pay for your cost of living. People have the tendency of thinking
"hey I can get this for free, and I can get this TODAY. hm those developers are cool. maybe I'll donate some day"
Then they download and use the thing. 97% forget about donating and never return. Of the remaining people, they donate maybe $100 or something.
Re: Flynn - Open Source PaaS powered by Docker
#90Earlier quoted context omitted.
Thanks-- we definitely plan to explore ways for individuals to support the project.
If open source projects had always required $50,000+ to get started, we might not have GNU/Linux today. Why can't you start the project first and then ask for donations later? Are you saying that unless you guys get paid you're not going to work on the project?
We answered this in the FAQ: We will still build it, but development will take much longer and the finished product will be less polished.
We're experimenting with a model that allows us to work full-time on a project for long enough to make it a viable production system.