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

What has Docker become?

tuananh.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 286 posts

Re: What has Docker become?

#251

Post by shykes »

justsomehnguy wrote: post #248
shykes wrote: post #133

Hi, I'm the founder of Docker. I started it in 2008 (under the name Dotcloud) and left in 2018. AMA.

'Bridge' was and still is an established network term for joining two broadcast domains into one. Why the hell you decided to name your NAT'ed network layer a 'bridge'?

As far as I know, Docker uses the term "bridge" in the standard way, to designate the use of Linux bridge interfaces (basically virtual ethernet switches) to interconnect containers. Containers connect to each other via a layer 2 bridge, not NAT.

Re: What has Docker become?

#252

Post by amluto »

JCattheATM wrote: post #238
amluto wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Docker is still maintaining the runtime on which orbstack, podman Podman? Podman appears to have reimplemented basically everything. What runtime are you talking about?

Hub.

What do you mean? There is a website called Docker Hub. There is a competing product, affiliated with Podman, called Quay, which is also a website and an on-prem solution that I think you can pay for and also an open-source product:

https://github.com/quay/quay

Re: What has Docker become?

#254

Post by ghthor »

shykes wrote: post #231
daveisfera wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There was probably a lot going on behind closed doors, but from the outside, it appeared that RedHat was trying to improve the security and technical details of containers, but Docker was just refusing pull requests and not playing nice. This eventually drove RedHat to make their own implementation (i.e. Podman), so it was a self created enemy and not necessarily one that was built-in/inevitable. I'm definitely not a…

I am painfully aware of that narrative. All I can say is that it is a false narrative, deliberately pushed by Red Hat for competitive reasons. There was a deliberate decision to spend marketing dollars making Docker look bad (specifically less secure), at a time where we were competing directly in the datacenter market. Ask yourself: how many open source projects reject PRs every day because of design disagreements?…

Not sure the docker license supports calling distribution patches “unauthorized”

Re: What has Docker become?

#255

Post by calmoo »

eigencoder wrote: post #129
thiagoperes wrote: post #22

Switched to OrbStack in one prompt using Claude. It’s a night and day difference

What's better about it?

For one, it has dynamic memory allocation and is much faster and resource efficient. Drop in replacement. It also has a rather nice UI,

Re: What has Docker become?

#256

Post by JCattheATM »

amluto wrote: post #252
JCattheATM wrote: post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hub.

What do you mean? There is a website called Docker Hub. There is a competing product, affiliated with Podman, called Quay, which is also a website and an on-prem solution that I think you can pay for and also an open-source product: https://github.com/quay/quay

> There is a competing product, affiliated with Podman, called Quay

Most stuff is not published on Quay; most podman users use Docker Hub or Compose files.

Re: What has Docker become?

#257

Post by shykes »

ghthor wrote: post #254
shykes wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am painfully aware of that narrative. All I can say is that it is a false narrative, deliberately pushed by Red Hat for competitive reasons. There was a deliberate decision to spend marketing dollars making Docker look bad (specifically less secure), at a time where we were competing directly in the datacenter market. Ask yourself: how many open source projects reject PRs every day because of design disagreements?…

Not sure the docker license supports calling distribution patches “unauthorized”

The trademark policy does.

In any case I meant it in an informal software engineering sense: it's bad form for a packager to distribute upstream software under its original name, with substantial modifications beyond what users would expect distro packagers to make - backporting, build rules, etc.

For such a downstream change to introduce security vulnerabilities is a major fuckup. To actively blame upstream for said vulnerability, while competing with them in the market, is unethical.

Re: What has Docker become?

#258

Post by amluto »

JCattheATM wrote: post #256
amluto wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do you mean? There is a website called Docker Hub. There is a competing product, affiliated with Podman, called Quay, which is also a website and an on-prem solution that I think you can pay for and also an open-source product: https://github.com/quay/quay

> There is a competing product, affiliated with Podman, called Quay Most stuff is not published on Quay; most podman users use Docker Hub or Compose files.

> Most stuff is not published on Quay; most podman users use Docker Hub

or GHCR, etc. Docker Hub is hardly a “runtime”.

> or Compose files.

Compose files aren’t a replacement for Docker Hub. And Podman has a reimplementation of compose.

Re: What has Docker become?

#259

Post by JCattheATM »

amluto wrote: post #258
JCattheATM wrote: post #256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There is a competing product, affiliated with Podman, called Quay Most stuff is not published on Quay; most podman users use Docker Hub or Compose files.

> Most stuff is not published on Quay; most podman users use Docker Hub or GHCR, etc. Docker Hub is hardly a “runtime”. > or Compose files. Compose files aren’t a replacement for Docker Hub. And Podman has a reimplementation of compose.

> Docker Hub is hardly a “runtime”.

In the context of your question Hub makes sense, as it is something Docker maintains that most podman users still rely on

> Compose files aren’t a replacement for Docker Hub.

Correct, but most compose files refer to Docker Hub.

You seem to be highlighting that alternatives, which I don't dispute, but most people are overwhelmingly using the services that Docker maintain. That's the answer to your question. Read up a few replies if you've forgotten the context.

Re: What has Docker become?

#260

Post by MikeNotThePope »

hashstring wrote: post #253
ronsor wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And humans are just a wrapper around oxygen, food, and water.

That’s just a wrapper around quarks for the most part…

I personally identify as a quark-gluon plasma held together by the strong force and a sheer lack a boundaries.
Post reply on HN