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

261–270 of 334 posts

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

#261

Post by bigiain »

saurik wrote: post #193
Symbiote wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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,…

This is the exact quote that was already up-thread of here, and they absolutely are not claiming they "never said that"; instead, they are clarifying that "organization data" does not include "public images", and while that's confusing, I can appreciate why they didn't think it would be and--lo and behold--they are publicly apologizing for being so confusing and taking the hit for having done so.

Its the very next sentence after that one that they are claiming has been practically universally "misunderstood".

"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."

The cynical devil on my left shoulder is telling me "Some smartass in an emergency meeting noted the ambiguity in that second sentence, and suggested lets just claim that 'During that time you will maintain access to any images' did not actually mean it's obvious implication that 'after that time you will no linger have access to any images' and this is all just a big misunderstanding" - and that how we ended up with this new "clarification".

The even more cynical devil on my right shoulder is telling me some actively evil asshole intentionally wrote that ambiguous sentence to give themselves a 'get out of jail card' in case complaints went viral...

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

#262

Post by bigiain »

themitigating wrote: post #120
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.

If you run a company wouldn't it be cheaper to just pay. This can't be worth the trouble changing everything

Sure.

This is just a big "fuck you" to non company supported open source projects, as it turns out even ones labelled "sponsored css" on Docker Inc's own website.

Which are all clearly insignificant and unimportant, dumb little command line utilities and libraries like, say, curl...

https://github.com/docker/hub-feedback/issues/2314#issuecomm...

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

#263

Post by bigiain »

wholinator2 wrote: post #179
eternalban wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't that like a service like Github saying 'you will maintain access to any of your public projects' as in administrative access to one's own projects . After that period, you are no longer the owner of that repo and you no longer have "access". So I can still clone your github project but alas you no longer can commit to it. https://docs.docker.com/docker-hub/orgs/ https://hub.docker.com/orgs

Doesn't sound like it to me. If they meant "administrative access" they should have said "administrative access". They didn't, they just said "access" which unambiguously means just "access". Would've been very easy for them to make a one word correction somewhere in the dozen or so people who should have read this before it went out. But they didn't, they just said "access". If they wanted unambiguous meaning, they…

> They didn't, they just said "access" which unambiguously means just "access".

Not only that, they said access to your public images. Not "access to your account" or "access to your project". They explicitly mention "any images in your public repositories" as a thing that you will "maintain access" to "during that time".

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

#264

Post by zamnos »

bruce511 wrote: post #253
ilyt wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Delete them. Keeping them read only is literally the worst solution. Old images that can't be updated and accrue security flaws, all while uninformed users see address still work and assume nothing needs to be changed. Your corporation picked literally worst way to do it.

>> Your corporation picked literally worst way to do it. I disagree. The worst way would be to make a blanket decision for all projects on their behalf. This way they let the project maintainer decide. For projects that don't get updated, it's better to leave them where they are. For projects that are changing the maintainers can choose to delete (or move to a paid / OSS plan). Choice is good, and giving that choice…

You didn't address the issue of security. The problem with leaving it up to the projects is that projects won't necessarily respond, and we don't want the foundations of the next Mantis 26M rps botnet to get its start from PULL insecure:latest.

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

#265

Post by zamnos »

2h wrote: post #204
mikesir87 wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(from Docker DevRel team) > Given these statements directly contradict each other Actually... they aren't contradictory. The organization data will be retained for 30 days and is subject to deletion. That data includes the teams, memberships, etc. But, it wasn't clear what we were going to do about the images. Keeping the public images is important as many other images build on top of them. > It feels like they chang…

> Actually... they aren't contradictory. you're on the Docker DevRel team, why are you talking like this? why do you feel the need to be confrontational? not a good look.

Somewhere in Silicon Valley are the people who were passed over for this job, yelling at their phones. Maybe they should get a call back.

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

#266

Post by aspectmin »

Ugh. We war-roomed, and subsequently kicked off a big project this morning to replace most, if not all, docker in our infrastructure and dev systems with podman.

The first messaging clearly read to me that they would delete everything (including images), the second just seems like they backtracked internally despite claiming a different meaning for the original message.

I have lost trust in this company.

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

#267

Post by dheera »

bleuchase wrote: post #199
dheera wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> One of the difficulties of public relations is communicating to multiple audiences at once. Why not just release multiple statements and links? "Click here for customized PR statement if you are a open source developer" "Click here for customized PR statement if you are a closed source developer" "Click here for customized PR statement if you are an executive who can't code" "Click here for customized PR statement…

Is that a serious suggestion? Who on earth would take the time to look through all of those to see which one best fits them? Companies have enough trouble getting press releases read already.

I guess then you could use some heuristics and ChatGPT to tailor the press release to the particular viewer.

For example if the user has a screen resolution of three 4K monitors side by side, using Linux, and coming from a Silicon Valley IP address, they are probably a developer. If they have the screen resolution of an iPad Pro and a New York IP address they are probably an executive on the go. The HTML5 accelerometer API might also say something about whether they're reading your press release in bed, while sitting, or standing. Use ChatGPT to reword the press release appropriately.

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

#269

Post by Volundr »

tobyjsullivan wrote: post #73
Volundr wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I assume they mean Docker issues an invoice which the company's AP department can then pay by either cutting a check or ACH transfer. At least that's what we had to get all our vendors to start doing when the company I worked for killed off corporate cards and quit letting employees expense things like this.

I have many issues with Docker the business but, have to say, this situation sounds like they might not be the problem quite as much as the employer.

Meh maybe. But it's actually a pretty common restriction for whatever reason in large enterprises, and not something your average dev can influence.

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

#270

Post by Twirrim »

foobiekr wrote: post #226
mikesir87 wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(from Docker DevRel team) > Given these statements directly contradict each other Actually... they aren't contradictory. The organization data will be retained for 30 days and is subject to deletion. That data includes the teams, memberships, etc. But, it wasn't clear what we were going to do about the images. Keeping the public images is important as many other images build on top of them. > It feels like they chang…

So you’re going to continue to host images that have severe remote code execution exploits? With no way for the person who posted them to ask people not to use them?

> So you’re going to continue to host images that have severe remote code execution exploits?

That seems an great way to take some very significant reputation hits.

Post reply on HN