Live data from Hacker News

Docker is deleting Open Source organisations - what you need to know

blog.alexellis.io

741–750 of 764 posts

Re: Docker is deleting Open Source organisations - what you need to know

#741

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Come on, 30 days notice is a walk in the park. Additionally, OP was the one complaining that changing a few URLs and eventually spinning up a new server. It's quite literally a one day or two job, unless you're at a company the size of Amazon (in which case, luckily for you, you're not the only SRE, so it's still just a few days). > The best I can come up with, at the moment, is waiting for each organization to make…

“Tell me you’ve never worked an enterprise tech job without telling me you’ve never worked an enterprise tech job.” My next 30 days are already accounted for, and will already include disruptions that actually come from the area of work.

Looks like some of the planned work's getting pushed back a little bit. That's the company paying the price for saving money earlier in exchange for taking on more risk. Decent chance the move was still net-beneficial for them.

Either way, it's the company reaping the benefits and paying the costs, not me.

It would have been nice and more confidence-generating for Docker to make this a 90-day notice rather than 30, but I'm not going to get upset that some of the work my company wants to do will get done slightly later for reasons having to do with their own penny-pinching and some 3rd party's somewhat-rude notice period for termination of service to entities that aren't even us and who weren't paying them. Job's a job. You want me to fix this and delay some other thing, or let it break and do some other thing instead? Fix it? Cool, no problem.

Re: Docker is deleting Open Source organisations - what you need to know

#742

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Most importantly, nix is incredibly invasive in development process, adopting it requires heavy time investments. Typically yes, but Nix actually allows you to be less pure to save time and pick your most economic point on the reproducibility continuum. I'm fairly sure there was an article about this... ah here it is: https://www.haskellforall.com/2022/08/incrementally-package-...

This isn't what I was talking about, I'm all for being as pure as possible, dial the reproducibility and isolation to the max. Unfortunately, Nix itself as an application is not isolated. It requires a unique installation process to be available for users, because it wants to manage its store at the root level (/nix/store/), but I hear the situation is different on macOS. Applications packaged with Nix also require s…

> It requires a unique installation process to be available for users, because it wants to manage its store at the root level (/nix/store/)

Yes, for cache hits to happen it has to be this way as far as I remember.

There is a project called nix-portable though that I've seen some HPC users report success with:

https://github.com/DavHau/nix-portable

> Applications packaged with Nix also require special treatment to run in Nix environment, with paths rewritten and binaries patched to support Nix filesystem structure instead of the traditional Linux one.

If you fully package it. If you use something like an buildFHSUserEnv[0] that's not true.

There is also nix-autobahn and nix-alien for automatically running foreign binaries on a more ad-hoc basis or to generate a starting point for packaging.

0: https://nixos.org/manual/nixpkgs/stable/#sec-fhs-environment...

Re: Docker is deleting Open Source organisations - what you need to know

#743

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But now, you all think it's 100% acceptable to just Who is this "all" you're talking to? Seems like most of the responses are suggesting vendoring too.

> Who is this "all" you're talking to? This is a thread under most updooted comment. Generally it is safe to assume that top comment more or less reflects general sentiment

"Reflects general sentiment" seems like quite a stretch. It doesn't take many upvotes to float to the top.

Re: Docker is deleting Open Source organisations - what you need to know

#744
Discord pricing model has been so much cool when compared to these reckless move by Docker.

Imagine the following:

[1] Ultra-bad rate-limiting by default to all public images.

[2] X$/month "boost" to have relaxed rate-limit for yourself & contributing some to the community.

[3] The popular the repository is, the higher rate limit it get.

[4] After Y$/month, Docker just suggest other repositories to "support", so the $$ tickle down the whole ecosystem.

[5] Simple feature which allows you to quickly view public images you are dependent on. And which one you/your organisation should support to.

But hey wait... welcome to the world run by VCs and shitty PM roles. :)

Re: Docker is deleting Open Source organisations - what you need to know

#745
post #725
post #671

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You should read The Phoenix Project to understand that "have dozens of high-priority projects to deliver in the next 30 days" is a consequence of poor management, not a given even for large organizations.

I've read TPP. What I'm saying is, most companies are Parts Unlimited before their awakening and a lot of us are Brent. I think the reason that book resonated so well the dysfunction described there is a lived reality for most IT workers.

Fair, but I’m also fair to call that out, I think!

And I do try to do less Brent things, I think there was a degree of amnesty given to Brent that we can improve on. We can all be more Bill, even if we’re still SMEs.

Something something managing up, or getting the kinds of Bill jobs to make the changes.

Re: Docker is deleting Open Source organisations - what you need to know

#746
post #572

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This whole thing is so weird. Why do so many organizations depend on the internet to function? It wasn't too long ago that it was standard practice to vendor your dependencies; that is, dump your dependencies into a vendor/ directory and keep that directory updated and backed up. But now, you all think it's 100% acceptable to just throw your hands up if github is down, or a maven repository is down, or docker hub mak…

There are some places that still work the old way, such as where I work - and we're finding we're increasingly out-of-touch with younger developers who grew up in a connected world. We had a recent college grad engineer (developer) who didn't work out as a hire. Some examples of the disconnect: Try as I might, I couldn't get him to understand the difference between "git" the tool and "Github" the website. He kept mak…

That is not a youner/older thing. That is just someone who does not understand the tech they are working with. I had one dude about 10 years ago roll into our org with the source code from another company. He saw nothing wrong with it. Our lawyers disagreed. I never let it past the code review stage.

Re: Docker is deleting Open Source organisations - what you need to know

#747
post #482

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My analysis of this: After Kubernetes became the de-facto container orchestration platform, Docker sold a bunch of their business to Mirantis. They shifted their marketing and positioning from enterprise to developers. From public sources, it sounds like their strategy is doing pretty well. The question then is, does Docker look like they are committed to open-source and the open-source ecosystem? 1. You would think…

From my understanding, Docker is moving to become an open to (proprietary) enterprise packager for closed source, or paid for software development. - Keep access to big, permissively licensed open source software. - Charge for higher pulling limits and tools. - Keep source open, but infra closed, hence converting whole infra to "source available". - Keep "small open source fish" out of the pond, by charging for what'…

Interesting, "snap store of containers" sounds plausible. Seems like a decent business model, but also, one that is not really committed to the open source ecosystem.

To go back to the question that started this out -- should we be worried about having image dependencies pulled out all of the sudden? It sounds like, if it is a large open source project, probably not so soon. That includes the `library` repos.

Any smaller project should be vendored if they are still sticking to Docker Hub.

Re: Docker is deleting Open Source organisations - what you need to know

#748

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ada has no ecosystem, and a lot of the ecosystem that does exist is proprietary, and it brings us back to point #2.

> Ada has no ecosystem, and a lot of the ecosystem that does exist is proprietary, Not no ecosystem, but yes it's way smaller... probably even smaller than Rust, yes. > and it brings us back to point #2. I seriously doubt it. Ada is supported directly in gcc; why would it have any worse platform coverage than anything else?

it would be fun if we could simulate the world where systemd was written in Ada and then read all the comments/criticism

Re: Docker is deleting Open Source organisations - what you need to know

#749

As an SRE Manager, this is causing me a hell of a headache this morning. In 30 days a bunch of images we depend on may just disappear. We mostly depend on images from relatively large organizations (`alpine`, `node`, `golang`, etc), so one would want to believe that we'll be fine - they're all either in the open source program or will pay. But I can't hang my hat on that. If those images disappear, we lose the abilit…

First of all, want to say, that sounds deeply frustrating. Secondly, if this is a serious worry. I would recommend creating your own private docker registry. https://docs.docker.com/registry/deploying/ Then I would download all current versions of the images you use within your org and push them up to said registry. It’s not a perfect solution, but you’ll be able to pull the images if they disappear and considering t…

The regsync utility is very useful for this purpose. It’s part of this excellent regclient project:

https://github.com/regclient/regclient

Re: Docker is deleting Open Source organisations - what you need to know

#750
post #707

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is what I don't understand about Docker's policy switch. Aren't all the companies that would potentially pay them just going to switch to one of the main CSPs Container Registry service?

I assume that is what they want. Without the jucy margins on running the containers hosting images is never going to be profitable.

What do you mean? Running containers with docker is free as in beer, as well as docker itself being free as in speech. Do you mean docker desktop? Any reasonably proficient developer can install docker as cli only and doesn't even need the lousy electron app...
Post reply on HN