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

271–280 of 334 posts

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

#271

Post by TheDong »

pmoriarty wrote: post #240
terom wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you are deleting the organizational data and effectively archiving [1] all the images, keeping only the option for public images to be pulled but not updated... then how will affected maintainers be able to delete their now out of date public images after the 30 day cut-off? You will have to retain enough of the organization data to allow that to happen. Keeping the public images available in an archived state is…

"somewhat irresponsible for the `latest` tag. A `latest` tag that cannot be updated is ... worse than no `latest` tag" What's irresponsible is relying on a "latest" tag for updates.

The irresponsible thing is making it so the tag exists, but the organization behind it cannot update it.

Let's take for example the "jenkins/jenkins:latest" image.

Jenkins is notorious for having security updates, so in 2 years, if the latest tag is still there and frozen, it will be an attractive nuisance, causing people to download insecure software...

That's what the parent comment is trying to say. It's irresponsible to leave the image that implies it's "up to date and secure" because it's "latest", but is really insecure, and the organization owning it cannot change anything about that without paying $$. It's basically holding users of the image hostage.

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

#272

Post by fulafel »

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…

My first reaction to the news was "ok, net positive, unmaintained images will get cleaned up and break builds, and fewer people will then be bit by vulnerabilities in unknowingly used abanoned layers". But I guess not?

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

#273

Post by cuu508 »

ParetoOptimal wrote: post #259
mekster wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do I run the ecosystem the docker already has with nix alone? It's not just the runtime.

I'm super interested in the ecosystem you mean here. I'm assuming that you mean ecosystem around images like kubernetes, ECS, etc like the other commenter guessed? If so, I think Nix being able to create docker images addresses that specific concern.

Can nix run images created with docker?

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

#274

Post by sgammon »

jzb wrote: post #206
ericb wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Docker is over 100 million ARR from what I understand, so that's a strange thing to say.

But what’s their debt and running costs?

so it is impossible that such a thing could be eclipsed by revenues?

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

#275

Post by sgammon »

Aleklart wrote: post #117

I don’t get the hate of Docker as a company. Yes, this is crap technology that incentivise resource inefficiency at its peak form, but this is how stacks like ruby or python are at least working. Still, docker org invented all the tools, gave them for free, promote, document and support them, gave free global registry that can be filled by anyone and contains petabytes of trash, with free thousands of terabytes of eg…

i think the hate comes from them squandering a position of their magnitude, built upon the investment and trust of the open source ecosystem.

github set a precedent with free public repos, but they traded the cost of supporting that for being the canonical way to store source code online (or as close to it as one company can get).

docker accesses this privilege but then demands that open source people, who are by definition not paid for their work directly, must pay to host images on their branded platform, the one which guarantees them a place in the technology hall of fame.

the double-punch of that failed remunerative trade ends up feeling to that community like a betrayal; not to mention the self-defeating strategy it embodies, since a technical solution here is not only possible, but would be expected from a company granted that position and privilege in the software supply chain (technical aptitude / excellence).

at worst it is a betrayal, at best it comes across as lazy, because they are not reaching for a technical solution which can satisfy every constraint; they are satisfied launching one that merely satisfies their own needs, to the detriment of the community that supported them.

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

#276

Post by sgammon »

Aleklart wrote: post #117

I don’t get the hate of Docker as a company. Yes, this is crap technology that incentivise resource inefficiency at its peak form, but this is how stacks like ruby or python are at least working. Still, docker org invented all the tools, gave them for free, promote, document and support them, gave free global registry that can be filled by anyone and contains petabytes of trash, with free thousands of terabytes of eg…

i love Docker, but i think people by and large forget that OCI images are a thing, and that ultimately we are talking about slightly complex tarballs here.

i do think Docker is squandering an insanely privileged position here, even if i'm not particularly invested/dogmatic personally about Docker as a brand. only every so often does a company become a member of the popular lexicon -- an Uber instead of a Taxi, a Kleenex instead of a tissue -- we pull Docker images every day even though they are actually OCI images, or hosted on GitHub.

this privilege is insanely huge and it is one granted through technical aptitude, intense problem solving, commitment to open source and tooling, and so on, that the Docker project displayed for its first two decades or so of existence.

where it fell off that wagon as a brand, and misaligned with its technology, i don't know. this is just one person's 2c.

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

#277

Post by sgammon »

this is a great reason to use OCI images and a Codespace on your Mac or Windows machine and just skip the entire "Docker" step altogether. just a reminder that you can do this, docker images are just tarballs, and the faster you exit a vice the less it can squeeze you.
Post reply on HN