4 ms·
CoreOS's rkt and Docker's containerd jointly donated to CNCF
- fs111 10y agoso there is no money in either technology, is that what it means?
- mwpmaybe 10y agoAre you suggesting that there's no money in any open-sourced technology? Is there money in Linux?
- icebraining 10y agoSeems like fs111 is suggesting there's no money in these particular components. Which seems plausible to me.
- eikenberry 10y ago> Is there money in Linux? http://www.nasdaq.com/symbol/rht http://www.nasdaq.com/symbol/rht
- wmf 10y agoThere definitely was never any money in basic container runtimes, but this move is more like Docker playing nice after Red Hat & Google threatened to burn it down. And I guess rkt got thrown in for FOMO.
- bogomipz 10y ago>"this move is more like Docker playing nice after Red Hat & Google threatened to burn it down." Can you elaborate on this particular incident?
- wmf 10y agohttps://thenewstack.io/docker-fork-talk-split-now-table/ https://thenewstack.io/docker-fork-talk-split-now-table/
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- timthelion 10y agoWhat is up with the use of the term "donated" when in comes to transfering control of open source code to a standards body? There is no legal transfer taking place, and politically, there if there is a power transfer, the power transfer happens in the form of the "doner" gaining more power over the "receiver". In the real world of serious standard bodies, the standard body does not "receive a donation of a standard" but works on choosing and developing the best standard possible based on technical merits.
- wmf 10y agoCNCF is not a standards body and can you explain this part: politically, the power transfer happens in the form of the "donor" gaining more power over the "receiver"
- timthelion 10y agoYes, I can explain. Look at this issue https://github.com/opencontainers/image-spec/issues/24 https://github.com/opencontainers/image-spec/issues/24 and notice the belligerant and proprietary attitudes of the Docker employee. He thinks that because the standard is based on the Docker project, he somehow has more say in what will be decided than the other speakers. There is an implied ownership which is not translated when the donation takes place.
- justincormack 10y agoWell I see a CoreOS employee saying that the spec should remain compatible with Docker until after 1.0. The image spec was not "donated" to OCI, various people decided to make a spec for roughly what Docker was doing already, in order to formalise it, with an agreement to do a 1.0 quickly. It was not a standard to create an all new spec, at least initially. There are a lot of existing images out there, so incremental change and backward compatibility is important.
- crb 10y agoThere absolutely is a legal transfer. the donation assigns copyright, and normally includes the intellectual property rights of the trademark and logo. In theory, the recipient could choose to relicense.
- mevile 10y agoThis is great news. It's great that the bigger players in container runtimes are working together more, it makes me hopeful for the future. This is great for users and developers.