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

I ditched Docker for Podman

codesmash.dev

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

401–410 of 670 posts

Re: I ditched Docker for Podman

#401

Post by preisschild »

mfenniak wrote: post #354
preisschild wrote: post #343

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you do OCI/container builds inside your forgejo-runner container?

People having trouble getting this configured is a common issue for self-hosting Forgejo Runner. As a Forgejo contributor, I'm currently polishing up new documentation to try to support people with configuring this; here's the draft page: https://forgejo.codeberg.page/@docs_pull_1421/docs/next/admi... (Should live at https://forgejo.org/docs/v12.0/admin/actions/docker-access/ once it is finished up, if anyone runs in…

Im not hosting a Forgejo instance (yet), but self-hosted Gitlab with gitlab-runner in Kubernetes, so I was wondering how you solved this.

I'm using dind too, but this requires privileged runners...

Re: I ditched Docker for Podman

#402

Post by rlpb »

weberc2 wrote: post #398
akerl_ wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem isn’t generally the cost, it’s the complexity. You end up having to track who has it installed. Hired 5 more people this week? How many of them will want docker desktop? Oh, we’ve maxed the licenses we bought? Time to re-open the procurement process and amend the purchase order.

I'm of the opinion that large companies should be paying for the software they use regardless of whether it's open source or not, because software isn't free to develop. So assuming you're paying for the software you use, you still have the problem that you are subject to your internal procurement processes. If your internal procurement processes make it really painful to add a new seat, then maybe the processes need…

> so it makes it really easy for companies to stiff the open source contributors

I don't think there's any stiffing going on, since the open source contributors knowingly contributed with a license that specifically says that payment isn't required. It is not reasonable for them to take the benefits of doing that but then expect payment anyway.

Re: I ditched Docker for Podman

#403

Post by chuckadams »

elliottr1234 wrote: post #173
nickthegreek wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anyone have opinions on OrbStack for mac over these other alternatives?

It's well worth it its much more than a gui for it supports running k8s locally, managing custom vm instances, resource monitoring of containers, built in local domain name support with ssl mycontainer.orb, a debug shell that gives you ability to install packages that are not available in the image by default, much better and automated volume mounting and view every container in finder, ability to query logs, an amaz…

Docker Desktops also supports a local kubernetes stack, but it takes several minutes to start up, and I think in the end it's just minikube? Haven't tried Orbstack's k8s stack myself since I'm good with k3d. I did have cause though to spin up a VM a while back, and that was buttah.

Re: I ditched Docker for Podman

#405

Post by maxprimer »

nickjj wrote: post #46
t43562 wrote: post #21

To provide 1 contrary opinion to all the others saying they have a problem: Podman rocks for me! I find docker hard to use and full of pitfalls and podman isn't any worse. On the plus side, any company I work for doesn't have to worry about licences. Win win!

> On the plus side, any company I work for doesn't have to worry about licences. Win win! Was this a deal breaker for any company? I ask because the Docker Desktop paid license requirement is quite reasonable. If you have less than 250 employees and make less than $10 million in annual revenue it's free. If you have a dev team of 10 people and are extremely profitable to where you need licenses you'd end up paying $9…

Even large companies with thousands of developers have budgets to manage and often times when the CT/IO sees free as an option that's all that matters.

Re: I ditched Docker for Podman

#406

Post by chuckadams »

vermaden wrote: post #380

I ditched Docker and Podman for FreeBSD Jails :) More here: - https://vermaden.wordpress.com/2023/06/28/freebsd-jails-cont... - https://vermaden.wordpress.com/2025/04/11/freebsd-jails-secu... - https://vermaden.wordpress.com/2025/04/08/are-freebsd-jails-... - https://vermaden.wordpress.com/2024/11/22/new-jless-freebsd-...

That's ... a lot of setup. Does FreeBSD have anything similar to containerd?

Re: I ditched Docker for Podman

#407

Post by carwyn »

ac130kz wrote: post #381
t43562 wrote: post #21

To provide 1 contrary opinion to all the others saying they have a problem: Podman rocks for me! I find docker hard to use and full of pitfalls and podman isn't any worse. On the plus side, any company I work for doesn't have to worry about licences. Win win!

It's works great until you need that one option from Docker Compose that is missing in Podman Compose (which is written in Python for whatever reason, yeah...).

You can use the real compose (Go) with Podman now. The Python clone is not your only option.

Re: I ditched Docker for Podman

#408

Post by jamra »

acdha wrote: post #321

I switched for local development work a couple of years back and can count on no fingers the number of times I thought about switching back. It let me stop thinking about the Docker Mac high CPU issue which was open for years with no progress, too.

Very nice. Macs have a new containers program. It’s open source on github but not ready for the current MacOS version. Might be an even better approach as it’s made by Apple.

Re: I ditched Docker for Podman

#409

Post by bityard »

weberc2 wrote: post #398
akerl_ wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem isn’t generally the cost, it’s the complexity. You end up having to track who has it installed. Hired 5 more people this week? How many of them will want docker desktop? Oh, we’ve maxed the licenses we bought? Time to re-open the procurement process and amend the purchase order.

I'm of the opinion that large companies should be paying for the software they use regardless of whether it's open source or not, because software isn't free to develop. So assuming you're paying for the software you use, you still have the problem that you are subject to your internal procurement processes. If your internal procurement processes make it really painful to add a new seat, then maybe the processes need…

"stiff the open source contributors"

I'm not sure you realize that "open source" means anyone anywhere is free to use, modify, and redistribute the software in any way they see fit? Maybe you're thinking of freeware or shareware which often _do_ come with exceptions for commercial use?

But anyway, as an open source contributor, I have never felt I was being "stiffed" just because a company uses some software that I helped write or improve. I contribute back to projects because I find them useful and want to fix the problems that I run into so I don't have to maintain my own local patches, help others avoid the same problems, and because making the software better is how I give back to the open source community.

Re: I ditched Docker for Podman

#410

Post by odie5533 »

mychael wrote: post #191

OP fails to understand that in practice people use Docker Desktop on their laptop and deploy to a container platform or Kubernetes cluster that uses ContainerD. So all of these so-called issues are moot. Further, Docker Inc (and the people behind Docker CLI, Compose etc), have way better UX taste and care for DX than their competitors which matters a lot in local development.

The UI is what held me back from switching last time I tried podman. Docker Desktop is nice.
Post reply on HN