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

We apologize. We did a terrible job announcing the end of Docker Free Teams

docker.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 334 posts

Re: We apologize. We did a terrible job announcing the end of Docker Free Teams

#161

Post by isatty »

YuriNiyazov wrote: post #113
WWLink wrote: post #13

Ah, good ole Docker. When they did the "it's not free anymore" rugpull on Docker Desktop, I couldn't use it at work anymore since they wouldn't invoice us for less than a 50 seat license. Unfortunately, a lot of businesses won't buy things without invoicing for legal reasons. It really upset me because I had a pretty solid workflow with docker desktop on a mac. Now I can't use that anymore. I am not surprised they co…

Ah, the good ole "my company won't pay for a $5/month tool that I like because the tool maker won't invoice my company for less than 50 users, so instead of paying $5/month myself on my credit card, I literally 'can't use it anymore' out of principle."

That's literally how it works in big corps and how it should work in general - company property should be paid for by the company, and the companies liability in case anything goes wrong.

You should not be giving your $x (it does not matter that its only 5) to the company.

Re: We apologize. We did a terrible job announcing the end of Docker Free Teams

#162

Post by hgsgm »

afarrell wrote: post #6
mellowyeller wrote: post #3

The third sentence in their apology is "This impacted less than 2% of our users." What is that supposed to convey? It feels like a handwave. 'We're sorry we mistreated you, look how small you are to us.'

One of the difficulties of public relations is communicating to multiple audiences at once. One of Docker’s audiences are the paying customers who outside that 2% and would want some assurance that if docker makes errors, those errors are smaller in magnitude. This statement seems like it is aimed at assuaging the worries of that audience. Is it good practice? I do not know.

There are 2 audiences: 1 with impact and 1 with 100% impact. The relative size of those audiences is irrelevant to the people in the audience.

Re: We apologize. We did a terrible job announcing the end of Docker Free Teams

#163

Post by ericb »

renewiltord wrote: post #68
ericb wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems the concept of a loss leader is "lost" on Docker. Some MBA with a spreadsheet at Docker hasn't realized that where the upstream OSS goes, the rest follow.

They've historically had trouble having that loss leader lead to a non-loss.

A lot of folks have missed the updates--they are now past 100 million in annual recurring revenue--that history has evolved.

Re: We apologize. We did a terrible job announcing the end of Docker Free Teams

#164

Post by bombcar »

nikolay wrote: post #153
vertis wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Deleting 'organization data' absolutely read that they would delete everything. Changing direction and back pedaling with a non-apology is borderline insulting. I understand the need to make money as a company, but it really is biting the hand that fed messing with open source maintainers

They really think we're idiots!

We have learned that public images are NOT organization data!

Re: We apologize. We did a terrible job announcing the end of Docker Free Teams

#165

Post by worksonmine »

djha-skin wrote: post #108
nielsole wrote: post #56

Previous communication: > If you don't upgrade to a paid subscription, Docker will retain your organization data for 30 days, after which it will be subject to deletion. During that period you will maintain access to any of your public images. New communication: > We’d also like to clarify that public images will only be removed from Docker Hub if their maintainer decides to delete them. We’re sorry that our initial…

rolls eyes OR, their marketing and DevRel departments and their engineering departments simply had a miscommunication; when it was realized, the present post was composed. This kind of thing happens inside companies all the time, including the one you're probably working at right now. No need to get up in arms over it.

I don't believe it was a miscommunication. Even if it was a company as important as Docker inc, mentioning DELETING containers requires some care and should raise some flags at any serious communications department.

This is not just the wrong date for a convention in the newsletter. What impact does it have on the ecosystem they've built? Some really serious projects use Docker and even if they have their own repositories can they be sure the software they rely on can keep publishing containers?

Even at the tiny startups I've worked on I'm asked to proofread any technical stuff they want to publish, I assume Docker does too.

Re: We apologize. We did a terrible job announcing the end of Docker Free Teams

#166

Post by Symbiote »

hgsgm wrote: post #158
sleepytimetea wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly ! I remember the original email mentioned deletion and now they say "we never said that". Time to get rid of Docker in our world.

Please share a copy of that email.

Docker is sunsetting Free Team organizations

Free Team organizations are a legacy subscription tier that no longer exists. This tier included many of the same features, rates, and functionality as a paid Docker Team subscription.

After reviewing the list of accounts that are members of legacy Free Team organizations, we’ve identified yours as potentially being one of them.

If you own a legacy Free Team organization, access to paid features — including private repositories — will be suspended on April 14, 2023 (11:59 pm UTC). Upgrade your subscription before April 14, 2023 to continue accessing your organization.

If you don’t upgrade to a paid subscription, Docker will retain your organization data for 30 days, after which it will be subject to deletion. During that time, you will maintain access to any images in your public repositories, though rate limitations will apply. At any point during the 30-day period, you can restore access to your organization account if you upgrade to a paid subscription. Visit our FAQ [1] for more information.

[1] https://web.docker.com/rs/790-SSB-375/images/privatereposfaq...

Re: We apologize. We did a terrible job announcing the end of Docker Free Teams

#167

Post by setr »

yencabulator wrote: post #149
mikesir87 wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(from the Docker DevRel team) "During that period" refers to the 30-day period. During that time, the images are accessible. After the 30-day period, they will still be pull-able, but not able to be updated.

So, any public image where the maintainer doesn't jump through hoops gets frozen in time, unable to be updated, and starts accumulating CVEs? This sounds worse than deleting the image. Any smart FOSS maintainer will find alternate hosting...

> Any smart FOSS maintainer will find alternate hosting...

I think that’s obviously the point of the whole exercise — pony up or leave. They’re just doing it in an annoying manner

Re: We apologize. We did a terrible job announcing the end of Docker Free Teams

#168

Post by hgsgm »

isatty wrote: post #161
YuriNiyazov wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah, the good ole "my company won't pay for a $5/month tool that I like because the tool maker won't invoice my company for less than 50 users, so instead of paying $5/month myself on my credit card, I literally 'can't use it anymore' out of principle."

That's literally how it works in big corps and how it should work in general - company property should be paid for by the company, and the companies liability in case anything goes wrong. You should not be giving your $x (it does not matter that its only 5) to the company.

[flagged]

Re: We apologize. We did a terrible job announcing the end of Docker Free Teams

#169

Post by bravetraveler »

sofixa wrote: post #134
gpm wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Someone on lobste.rs mentioned quay.io (maintained by redhat) as an alternative to dockerhub. Anyone have any experience with it?

It started as a CoreOS project and for a long time it was the only ebterprisey registry, and it included security scanning. Had some availability issues some time ago, but AFAIK today it's pretty good.

The software is nice, if looking to run your own - I'd recommend it over the typical Docker-provided incantation

Way more enterprise appropriate, for example - granular control on caches

Re: We apologize. We did a terrible job announcing the end of Docker Free Teams

#170

Post by SomeCallMeTim »

lozenge wrote: post #24
phphphphp wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The 2% they’re referring to are businesses that are using Docker’s hosted services for free. The majority of the outrage was from people thinking about the non-business users, that is, open source projects, which Docker unintentionally implied would be impacted by this change. Docker are apologising for their poor communication which made people think this change applied to more than just a tiny portion of the user b…

Anybody who uses "docker pull" or "FROM" and not pointing at their own hosting or their own paid Docker account was affected as evidenced by the thousands of comments worried about the impact.

No. This was NEVER implied at all.

This only ever applied to the *Team* accounts. I have a paid non-team/personal account, but I am also aware that I could have a free personal account if I didn't need private repositories.

In other words, they weren't clear enough in their communication, which is what they're apologizing for.

But the internet outrage mob is going to yell about the evil of The Man no matter what I say, so I don't know why I bother...

Post reply on HN