Live data from Hacker News

The Future of Docker Containers

lwn.net

11–15 of 15 posts

Re: The Future of Docker Containers

#11
post #6

The future of Docker containers is a slow death now that there are better container solutions that provide more benefits and less bloat. Docker had great engineers and developers, but terrible management.

What are current overall better container solutions than Docker now, which are adopted in companies worldwide?

Podman for Docker-specific, and cri-o for K8S.

Re: The Future of Docker Containers

#12
post #3

The future of Docker containers is a slow death now that there are better container solutions that provide more benefits and less bloat. Docker had great engineers and developers, but terrible management.

I would love to read more about these solutions and their benefits over Docker!

Podman is one I am thinking of primarily, with the biggest benefit being first-class rootless integration:

https://opensource.com/article/19/2/how-does-rootless-podman...

Re: The Future of Docker Containers

#13
post #5

The future of Docker containers is a slow death now that there are better container solutions that provide more benefits and less bloat. Docker had great engineers and developers, but terrible management.

Better solutions such as?

https://opensource.com/article/19/2/how-does-rootless-podman...

Podman and cri-o.

Re: The Future of Docker Containers

#14

> Crosby explained that a registry would still be needed to handle the naming of images, but the content address blobs could be transferred from one machine to another without the need to directly interact with the registry. In the P2P model for image delivery, a registry could send a container image to one node, and then users could share and distribute images using something like BitTorrent sync. I believe this is…

Or way simpler: https://github.com/docker/distribution/pull/2906

Unfortunately the whole project seems abandoned...

Re: The Future of Docker Containers

#15
post #8

> Crosby explained that a registry would still be needed to handle the naming of images, but the content address blobs could be transferred from one machine to another without the need to directly interact with the registry. In the P2P model for image delivery, a registry could send a container image to one node, and then users could share and distribute images using something like BitTorrent sync. I believe this is…

I don't think many non-tech savvy people even know what BitTorrent is. So its mention is not going to trigger much one way or another. The only enterprises that would have an issue with are going to be companies in the media space.

Enterprises tend to have tech staff. Thousands is not atypical. I assume some of them have heard of it.
Post reply on HN