Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

We Need to Talk About Docker Hub

linuxserver.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 153 posts

Re: We Need to Talk About Docker Hub

#131

Post by TZubiri »

orf wrote: post #118
TZubiri wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's several use cases to virtualization. You might be under the illusion that you use docker for the same use cases, but you will probably find 3 or 4 use cases if you talk with other users: Deterministic testing, automated deployments, external dependency installation (docker run psql). Besides the semantic usecases of Docker which can be infinite, technically docker is a virtualization and isolation mechanism.…

> There's several use cases to virtualization Containers are not virtualisation. > So whatever you do with docker can also be done with type 1, 2 virtualization This statement is redundant. Whatever you do with docker can also be done with a Turing machine built using magic the gathering[1]. > There's plenty of junior programmers… And there are plenty of junior programmers who think containers = virtualisation :) 1.…

>Containers are not virtualisation.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Docker_(software)

>Docker is a set of platform as a service (PaaS) products that use OS-level virtualization to deliver software in packages called containers.[5]

https://lwn.net/Articles/179361/

>"Virtualization" is the act of making a set of processes believe that it has a dedicated system to itself.

>Full virtualization and paravirtualization are not the only approaches being taken, however. An alternative is lightweight virtualization, generally based on some sort of container concept.

https://people.freebsd.org/~bapt/pdfdocs/papers/jail.pdf

>To this end, we describe the newFreeBSD ‘‘Jail’’facility,which provides a strong partitioning solution, leveraging existing mechanisms, such as chroot(2), to what effectively amounts to a virtual machine environment.

> And there are plenty of junior programmers who think containers = virtualisation :)

At least we do agree on one thing, there is one and only one subpar engineer among us.

Re: We Need to Talk About Docker Hub

#132

Post by rad_gruchalski »

concerndc1tizen wrote: post #6

If you don't like it, then why don't you use a different provider? If you want free stuff, is your strategy to smear them into giving you more free stuff? Storage, compute, and traffic, isn't free. You've been the beneficiary of charity for years. Yes, the open source community has relied on this implicit charity as a parasite, by exploiting whatever free services they could. And now we're paying the price, as you sa…

Nah, I am pissed off at them because they just raised their prices by 80%. If I didn’t look into my teams config, they’d charge me $900 for 5 seats (was the minimum number of seats), instead of $360 for two. They’re fucking predatory and as soon as something cheaper comes by, I’m cancelling my subscriptions with them.

Re: We Need to Talk About Docker Hub

#133

Post by aspenmayer »

yjftsjthsd-h wrote: post #124
concerndc1tizen wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And once those services are fully developed, and the market is captured, do they still need to provide free services? Isn't compatibility issues a major problem for alternative registries?

> Isn't compatibility issues a major problem for alternative registries? Er, is it? I've used a handful of different registries and never hit anything that even resembled a compatibility problem. Have I just been lucky?

One example that springs to mind is Homebrew/MacPorts. I think they install things differently and might not be interoperable?

Re: We Need to Talk About Docker Hub

#134

Post by yjftsjthsd-h »

aspenmayer wrote: post #133
yjftsjthsd-h wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Isn't compatibility issues a major problem for alternative registries? Er, is it? I've used a handful of different registries and never hit anything that even resembled a compatibility problem. Have I just been lucky?

One example that springs to mind is Homebrew/MacPorts. I think they install things differently and might not be interoperable?

They do things differently, but what does that have to do with docker registries?

Re: We Need to Talk About Docker Hub

#135

Post by aspenmayer »

yjftsjthsd-h wrote: post #134
aspenmayer wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One example that springs to mind is Homebrew/MacPorts. I think they install things differently and might not be interoperable?

They do things differently, but what does that have to do with docker registries?

It’s an example of incompatibility in registries generally, which I thought was the nature of your surprise at its existence or occurrence. I’m not aware of any such incompatibilities among Docker registries, but other issues may affect usage such as rate limits. I’m not sure what the person you were responding to had in mind.

Re: We Need to Talk About Docker Hub

#136

Post by TZubiri »

yjftsjthsd-h wrote: post #123
TZubiri wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What else are you using containers for?

Testing things on my laptop and deploying services to my home lab. Both benefit enormously from the minimal overhead, fast deployment, and ease of completely removing a service once I'm done with it.

Ah yes, that was one of the main selling points of docker early on, fixing the "works on my machine".

The way I solve that problem is by working directly on testing/staging servers which have the same specs as production.

I almost never run stuff on my local machine, and if I do it's a well isolated piece of code whose IO signature I know exactly and I can mock external systems with ease.

Re: We Need to Talk About Docker Hub

#137

Post by joshstrange »

g-b-r wrote: post #95
joshstrange wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This 100%. I managed a hiring process last year (my first) and from the outset I wanted to make sure I let every applicant that we talked to know if we had decided to pass. It was a lot easier said/thought than done. That email is horrible to send. My stomach dropped out every time I hit “send”, for exactly the reasons you stated. I dreaded the replies which often included some kind of “Why?” question. I completely u…

Just as in personal relations, sending a final message rather than ghosting can be uncomfortable, but that's not an excuse not to do it. If/when you don't want to interact further, just say it (hopefully stating the reasons, such as that the hiring process is imperfect, but the company can't devote infinite resources to it); after you did that it's completely fine to ignore further inquiries.

This is exactly what I did. Everyone got an email no matter how uncomfortable, I would engage 1-2 emails past that then make it clear that I wasn't going to reply again.

Re: We Need to Talk About Docker Hub

#138

Post by orf »

TZubiri wrote: post #131
orf wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There's several use cases to virtualization Containers are not virtualisation. > So whatever you do with docker can also be done with type 1, 2 virtualization This statement is redundant. Whatever you do with docker can also be done with a Turing machine built using magic the gathering[1]. > There's plenty of junior programmers… And there are plenty of junior programmers who think containers = virtualisation :) 1.…

>Containers are not virtualisation. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Docker_(software) >Docker is a set of platform as a service (PaaS) products that use OS-level virtualization to deliver software in packages called containers.[5] https://lwn.net/Articles/179361/ >"Virtualization" is the act of making a set of processes believe that it has a dedicated system to itself. >Full virtualization and paravirtualization are no…

> At least we do agree on one thing, there is one and only one subpar engineer among us.

Indeed, the one who thinks containers are nothing but Docker.

Or better yet, the one who cites a PDF from 2000 or an article from 2006, both before ec2 even launched, to say virtualization is synonymous with containers as if the meaning hasn’t shifted since then…

Or, at the very least, the one who thinks “ssh apt-get install” is equivalent to a container image.

Re: We Need to Talk About Docker Hub

#139

Post by concerndc1tizen »

undecisive wrote: post #114
concerndc1tizen wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> if you genuinely would like a discussion about the pitfalls of the funding models of open source That is absolutely what I want, and I appreciate your contribution to the debate. > you're forced to use words like "smear", "parasite" I'm just trying to use fewer words, because people's attention spans are really short these days, which naturally requires the words to have more dense and intense meaning. > it's so mu…

> 1) explained why relying on Docker Hub is dangerous I mean, that's the other 770 words of the article. Except they're just giving their experience, and allowing you to come to your own decisions - because otherwise people might legitimately call them out for "smear" tactics. > 2) what the alternatives are, and why they're not good enough "as we grew we started mirroring our images to Gitlab and Quay.io," "Docker Hu…

Do I like being called a "self important ignoramus"?

No.

Does it make me belligerent?

Yes.

I care deeply about humanity, and I'm surprised to conclude that we will definitely have a civil war soon.

See you on the other side.

Re: We Need to Talk About Docker Hub

#140

Post by Ferret7446 »

nickjj wrote: post #108
joshstrange wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This 100%. I managed a hiring process last year (my first) and from the outset I wanted to make sure I let every applicant that we talked to know if we had decided to pass. It was a lot easier said/thought than done. That email is horrible to send. My stomach dropped out every time I hit “send”, for exactly the reasons you stated. I dreaded the replies which often included some kind of “Why?” question. I completely u…

I would much rather get an honest answer in any scenario, no matter what it is. There are people out there who would take that feedback and reflect on it in a positive way. How else can you improve or be mindful of things in the future if you don't even know what happened or what went wrong? I sort of feel like the people who don't give honest feedback or ghost aren't trying to protect anyone's feelings or are avoidi…

Do you actually though? A lot of people say they would rather get an honest answer but don't react very well in reality.

> They themselves have something going on internally that bothers them when it comes to giving or receiving feedback.

The idea that some people would judge them like this certainly wouldn't help people to try to be more honest and open, especially if such a person is demanding an "honest answer".

Post reply on HN