4 ms·

There is a reason why they call it the bleeding edge. It's up to you to evaluate the technology to see if it fits within your infrastructure. Calling docker out

by hackits 10y ago

There is a reason why they call it the bleeding edge. It's up to you to evaluate the technology to see if it fits within your infrastructure. Calling docker out and saying it's broken when its a free product seems to be miss guided.

tedunangst 10y ago
Free and broken are not mutually exclusive.
- hackits 10y ago
  It nothing about that. The main point is the whole community bitching a moaning about software that in all intent and purposes is given away free without any contribution by the users. The source code of Docker is open source so why doesn't the guy go in there and contribute his time and or his own money to support the project that to him is so vital? No doubt the guys working on Docker are super smart guys, though they too have bill's to pay and lives to live. So if you want to see Docker improve how about contributing back and or supporting their efforts with extra funding. Maybe they will have the funds to bring on more full time developers to hunt those obscure bugs or add those features that everyone wants? Discussing and putting down the developer with article titles such as 'Sad state of docker' to me shows self entitled the community around these projects are.
  - tedunangst 10y ago
    Extra funding? Because $100 million isn't enough?
    - hackits 10y ago
      $100 million isn't that much money for large teams.
  - andrewguenther 10y ago
    > given away free Except for, you know, the people who pay for it...https://www.docker.com/pricing https://www.docker.com/pricing > without any contribution by the users Then who are the over 1,000 contributors to the Docker repository? > supporting their efforts with extra funding I think they're doing just fine. https://www.crunchbase.com/organization/docker/funding-rounds https://www.crunchbase.com/organization/docker/funding-round... > how self entitled the community around these projects are. As a member of the "self entitled" community, I see a lot of ignorance in this comment. The developers of Docker are not just the >100 employees of Docker Inc, but also the over 1,000 members community who have contributed to the Docker project. Frustration with Docker isn't about entitlement, it is about frustration with a governing body run by a for-profit company with $180 million of funding who has shown a pattern of favoring shiny new features over stability and left their own community to clean up the mess of bugs left in their wake. So no, I don't think the community is self-entitled, I think the community just wants to see the project they've worked so hard to help build be competently maintained.
  - cyphar 10y ago
    Opinions here are my own. > It nothing about that. The main point is the whole community bitching a moaning about software that in all intent and purposes is given away free > without any contribution by the users. I remember that Jessie did a talk where she said that something like 4/5 contributions to Docker are from people who don't work for Docker Inc. I was one of them (I spend most of my time contributing to runC now because there's less politics there). So your point is categorically invalid. > The source code of Docker is open source so why doesn't the guy go in there and contribute his time and or his own money to support the project that to him is so vital? Docker Inc does not operate Docker like a community project. Maintainers are elected behind closed doors, most of the maintainers work for Docker Inc, Docker Inc has a roadmap that the community does not have access to, maintainers of Docker will not merge code if it is not strictly inline with Docker Inc's roadmap, they openly attack distributions like RedHat and openSUSE for applying out-of-tree patches to Docker. > No doubt the guys working on Docker are super smart guys The community is also fairly clever too, especially considering that we outnumber the number of people working for Docker Inc.
    - andrewguenther 10y ago
      > Docker Inc does not operate Docker like a community project. Maintainers are elected behind closed doors, most of the maintainers work for Docker Inc, Docker Inc has a roadmap that the community does not have access to, maintainers of Docker will not merge code if it is not strictly inline with Docker Inc's roadmap, they openly attack distributions like RedHat and openSUSE for applying out-of-tree patches to Docker. Thank you, thank you, thank you. This here is the truly sad state of Docker. Glad to see someone else in this thread sick of closed door governance bullshit and flat out bullying.
    - SEJeff 10y ago
      Which is super ironic as Redhat has some very nice "enterprise" patches for docker, that I use and prefer the redhat fork of docker due to: https://github.com/projectatomic/docker/blob/rhel7-1.10.3/README.md https://github.com/projectatomic/docker/blob/rhel7-1.10.3/RE...
andrewguenther 10y ago
Docker isn't free for everyone. The Docker project is maintained by a for-profit company which sells enterprise support and services. They're getting more or less the same broken product we get for free. They just get to wait three months for a fix instead of six...
matthewmacleod 10y ago
The cost or otherwise of Docker is totally orthogonal to whether or not it is a 'good', non-broken piece of software.

by hackits 10y ago

tedunangst 10y ago

Free and broken are not mutually exclusive.

hackits 10y ago
It nothing about that. The main point is the whole community bitching a moaning about software that in all intent and purposes is given away free without any contribution by the users. The source code of Docker is open source so why doesn't the guy go in there and contribute his time and or his own money to support the project that to him is so vital? No doubt the guys working on Docker are super smart guys, though they too have bill's to pay and lives to live. So if you want to see Docker improve how about contributing back and or supporting their efforts with extra funding. Maybe they will have the funds to bring on more full time developers to hunt those obscure bugs or add those features that everyone wants? Discussing and putting down the developer with article titles such as 'Sad state of docker' to me shows self entitled the community around these projects are.
- tedunangst 10y ago
  Extra funding? Because $100 million isn't enough?
  - hackits 10y ago
    $100 million isn't that much money for large teams.
- andrewguenther 10y ago
  > given away free Except for, you know, the people who pay for it...https://www.docker.com/pricing https://www.docker.com/pricing > without any contribution by the users Then who are the over 1,000 contributors to the Docker repository? > supporting their efforts with extra funding I think they're doing just fine. https://www.crunchbase.com/organization/docker/funding-rounds https://www.crunchbase.com/organization/docker/funding-round... > how self entitled the community around these projects are. As a member of the "self entitled" community, I see a lot of ignorance in this comment. The developers of Docker are not just the >100 employees of Docker Inc, but also the over 1,000 members community who have contributed to the Docker project. Frustration with Docker isn't about entitlement, it is about frustration with a governing body run by a for-profit company with $180 million of funding who has shown a pattern of favoring shiny new features over stability and left their own community to clean up the mess of bugs left in their wake. So no, I don't think the community is self-entitled, I think the community just wants to see the project they've worked so hard to help build be competently maintained.
- cyphar 10y ago
  Opinions here are my own. > It nothing about that. The main point is the whole community bitching a moaning about software that in all intent and purposes is given away free > without any contribution by the users. I remember that Jessie did a talk where she said that something like 4/5 contributions to Docker are from people who don't work for Docker Inc. I was one of them (I spend most of my time contributing to runC now because there's less politics there). So your point is categorically invalid. > The source code of Docker is open source so why doesn't the guy go in there and contribute his time and or his own money to support the project that to him is so vital? Docker Inc does not operate Docker like a community project. Maintainers are elected behind closed doors, most of the maintainers work for Docker Inc, Docker Inc has a roadmap that the community does not have access to, maintainers of Docker will not merge code if it is not strictly inline with Docker Inc's roadmap, they openly attack distributions like RedHat and openSUSE for applying out-of-tree patches to Docker. > No doubt the guys working on Docker are super smart guys The community is also fairly clever too, especially considering that we outnumber the number of people working for Docker Inc.
  - andrewguenther 10y ago
    > Docker Inc does not operate Docker like a community project. Maintainers are elected behind closed doors, most of the maintainers work for Docker Inc, Docker Inc has a roadmap that the community does not have access to, maintainers of Docker will not merge code if it is not strictly inline with Docker Inc's roadmap, they openly attack distributions like RedHat and openSUSE for applying out-of-tree patches to Docker. Thank you, thank you, thank you. This here is the truly sad state of Docker. Glad to see someone else in this thread sick of closed door governance bullshit and flat out bullying.
  - SEJeff 10y ago
    Which is super ironic as Redhat has some very nice "enterprise" patches for docker, that I use and prefer the redhat fork of docker due to: https://github.com/projectatomic/docker/blob/rhel7-1.10.3/README.md https://github.com/projectatomic/docker/blob/rhel7-1.10.3/RE...

andrewguenther 10y ago

Docker isn't free for everyone. The Docker project is maintained by a for-profit company which sells enterprise support and services. They're getting more or less the same broken product we get for free. They just get to wait three months for a fix instead of six...

matthewmacleod 10y ago

The cost or otherwise of Docker is totally orthogonal to whether or not it is a 'good', non-broken piece of software.