3 ms·

I am quite saddened by the article's tone: "technical debt of docker" ouch that's hurtful to Solomon and Sam... I personally always take the view that docker,

I am quite saddened by the article's tone: "technical debt of docker" ouch that's hurtful to Solomon and Sam... I personally always take the view that docker, by all accounts, blew off a potential once in decade chance of becoming the next VMware, because of its own arrogance and incompetence. But, I am very much disgusted by the community's misplaced hate towards docker, and the equally misguided euphemism towards the big corps, particularly Google. After all, the whole container community own it's creation to docker. One can always claim that container exits long before docker, but that's like claim there were always operating system before Unix, etc.

chumboslice 6y ago
I don't think technical debt is an insult. Docker is a fully-fledged platform, 90% of which is not in use in any Kubernetes cluster. It's bloat. That Swarm and everything else was baked into the platform along with the runtime makes it technical debt for those that necessarily have to support it. I don't think anyone hates docker. But there is an issue of hubris here.
- justicezyx 6y ago
  Then it should be called technical debt of dockershim, right? I don't want to nitpicking, but the tone of the article is definitely negative. And the whole community are not showing the respect to docker as a whole and brand.