13 ms·

Please don't upgrade Docker without asking first

280 points by timmytokyo 6y ago

rattray 6y ago
Auto-updates by default are great, but having no way to opt out of auto-updates (or at least, an update to a given known-bad version)? That's pretty bad.
- akvadrako 6y ago
  Agreed. For example iOS and stock Android, terrible designs.
  - anaerobicover 6y ago
    You can opt out of auto-update on iOS (for both individual apps and the OS).
    - akvadrako 6y ago
      Not really - it will keep bugging you to update.
- rightbyte 6y ago
  Why would you want auto-updates though. It just breaks your stuff. Grandmas' or devs' alike. I feel users rarely benifits. But sure having apps with user hostile functions being pushed without a way to say no is convenient for the responsible at those places. Atleast when you get a prompt you know why stuff fails afterward. Debugging silent auto update issues is a nightmare.
  - thitcanh 6y ago
    Really? Autoupdates are why we don’t have to code for Chrome 12 today. Autoupdates are awesome, just not for business, sometimes.
    - sjwright 6y ago
      Browsers have the benefit of massive interest in their beta releases. This substantially reduces the number of breaking changes which make it into auto-updated versions. Perhaps Docker could learn from this and only auto-update to versions which have been used by a large audience for N weeks with no regression reports.
  - rattray 6y ago
    On average, updates make stuff better. Getting them automatically and quickly is, on average, a good thing. Only when that becomes untrue for a sustained period of time should you turn off updates, but at that point, you're just sticking to a single pinned version until you're able to switch to a competitor. Vendors who just keep pushing user-hostile shit should lose customers, not (just) updaters.
    - rightbyte 6y ago
      Ye well I am fine with auto updates as long as it is possible to disable (without hacks or esoteric config file settings in GUI apps). The convinence of having the computer click "install latest version" in a prompt for you is minimal. I think it should be the user's choice. This trend in slow rollouts to see what breaks and using users for beta testing is annoying.
  - capableweb 6y ago
    I don't think what you're saying is necessarily true. Browsers for example are very resilient at this point, and seem to handle auto-updates just fine. Worst case scenario you can use a different browser for a couple of hours. The upside is that auto-updating works in most cases and users hardly notice, while you're shipping security fixes straight to them. With developer tools it's different. Your tool stops working and suddenly you cannot work. You often can't just change the tool either, without having to rewrite stuff. For this, it's necessary that versions stay the same until we're ready to upgrade. Same goes for libraries you're using and so on.
    - nitrogen 6y ago
      Browser updates break addons and workflows on a regular basis. Google for how to do something like add a shortcut to a website to the Android homescreen from Firefox, and chances are all the tutorials you find will be out of date.
  - TylerE 6y ago
    Seems like you've got a bit of reverse surviorship bias here. You don't notice all the updates that are flawless.
  - egypturnash 6y ago
    The deliriously unhip Wordpress installation running my website has auto-updates for minor versions turned on. Major updates still require my intervention. It pretty much always just... works. New exploits just get patched out. Of course, with the exception of the new "Gutenberg" editor, WP has always been ultra conservative in terms of major usage change.
  - benmller313 6y ago
    If updates to some software "Just breaks your stuff", you have bigger problems with the software than the decision to auto update or not.
brnt 6y ago
Try podman, I really like it.
- alibarber 6y ago
  I’ve also been using it and found it to be really good. Has helped me understand much more about containers and I’m a fan of its approach. Buildah is also a powerful tool.
- kevinmgranger 6y ago
  How does that help users on macOS?
  - SilverRed 6y ago
    Docker does not run on macos. It runs in a VM on mac. Podman also runs in a vm on macos.
    - kevinmgranger 6y ago
      podman-machine is deprecated and Vagrant is recommended instead.
  - broknbottle 6y ago
    https://developers.redhat.com/blog/2020/02/12/podman-for-macos-sort-of/ https://developers.redhat.com/blog/2020/02/12/podman-for-mac...
    - mikey_p 6y ago
      If you click through you'll see that podman-machine is deprecated and they now just instruct users to use Vagrant.
- heavyset_go 6y ago
  Last time I tried it, particularly using it for a Docker Compose replacement, it certainly wasn't the drop-in replacement that had feature parity with Docker that it was promoted as.
aftbit 6y ago
It looks like they've listened and decided to add a prompt before updating: https://github.com/docker/roadmap/issues/183#issuecomment-797412882 https://github.com/docker/roadmap/issues/183#issuecomment-79... Personally I don't see why auto-update is the job of the software... why not just use a system-wide package manager? I suppose on Mac or Windows, that means using the Store, which heavily restricts what software can do. How shortsighted...
- wlesieutre 6y ago
  Outside the Store, most Mac software uses Sparkle for updates, which gives you a nice UI with patchnotes and a choice to update or not (or even opt-in to automatic updates if you're feeling brave): https://sparkle-project.org/ https://sparkle-project.org/
  - thih9 6y ago
    It looks like this is the framework used by Docker Desktop too [1]. Perhaps they enabled auto updates by default? (I wouldn't know, I don't have any experience with Mac projects.) [1]: https://github.com/docker/roadmap/issues/183#issuecomment-797412882 https://github.com/docker/roadmap/issues/183#issuecomment-79...
    - yellowapple 6y ago
      Yeah, the problem is that Docker Desktop apparently downloads updates automatically in the background, and Sparkle by default apparently wants to kick off the install as soon as the download finishes. Which of course punts the concern from "Docker Desktop is installing potentially-broken updates without my consent" to "Docker Desktop is consuming network bandwidth - which might very well be metered - without my consent" - that is, hardly an improvement. If the Docker folks could not be actively hostile to user experience for two seconds, that would be great :)
  - haswell 6y ago
    Interestingly, they appear to be using Sparkle [0]. Oddly, stephen-turner claims that Sparkle is part of the reason it's taking some time to fix the issue. Direct quote: > As said above, we're working on this: we're planning to download the update in the background and then give the user the choice whether to update to it on next start. It's taken a little longer than we hoped because the Sparkle framework we use on Mac doesn't expect that workflow: once the update has been downloaded, it wants to apply it without confirmation at next shutdown. We are keen to retain the invisible download but give the user a choice whether to apply it later. It's hard to understand why they're struggling with a problem that seems to be solved by every other app that uses Sparkle... - [0] https://github.com/docker/roadmap/issues/183#issuecomment-797412882 https://github.com/docker/roadmap/issues/183#issuecomment-79...
slig 6y ago
Has version 3 improved docker on macOS in any way?
- purerandomness 6y ago
  No. We're still on the last stable version (2.5.0.1) Every version after that either doesn't start [1] or makes random containers miraculously stop working. The 2.x version has your CPU burning, but that seems to persist in 3.x [2]. I stopped trying after they pulled in the auto-upgrade feature. Our team has no time playing bug-hunt easter egg at random times. I honestly don't comprehend how this software gained such a wide adoption on Macs. Docker on Linux works flawlessly meanwhile. [1] https://github.com/docker/for-mac/issues/5146 https://github.com/docker/for-mac/issues/5146 [2] https://github.com/docker/for-mac/issues/5116 https://github.com/docker/for-mac/issues/5116
- smoldesu 6y ago
  No, and it's very likely that Docker may never improve very much on MacOS. There was already no shortage of trouble on x86 MacOS, I doubt the switch to ARM (and ostensibly, Big Sur) will make things any easier.
- Nextgrid 6y ago
  They now have an Electron-based config UI. That's obviously a big improvement.
jlv2 6y ago
This response totally misses the point. "Sorry about it, we rushed a bit the last update and introduce a severe bug. I'll try to fix it today and if I cannot, rollback last grpcfuse patches."
- elliotpage 6y ago
  An addendum by another developer later on doubly misses the point: https://github.com/docker/roadmap/issues/183#issuecomment-750124955 https://github.com/docker/roadmap/issues/183#issuecomment-75...
  - dmatech 6y ago
    It's common to be defensive with these sorts of things. I wish people would instead be inquisitive And ask about potential downsides vs. upsides, but it's much easier to respond that way when you feel like your job or status isn't at risk.
- Zealotux 6y ago
  It feels like an habit of the Docker team, they always try to defend their anti-user decisions with vague and uninspired corporate bs. They're barely trying. Another classic: https://github.com/docker/docker.github.io/issues/6910 https://github.com/docker/docker.github.io/issues/6910
  - p1necone 6y ago
    Wowww: https://github.com/docker/docker.github.io/issues/6910#issuecomment-589179980 https://github.com/docker/docker.github.io/issues/6910#issue... What the hell does "Docker's new direction to go back to its roots and focus on developer tooling" even mean? Docker is developer tooling, that's the whole product. That's not "going back to your roots" that's just doing your damn job.
    - aidenn0 6y ago
      Is it developer tooling or deployment tooling?
Animats 6y ago
Resistance is futile. You will be upgraded.
- MattGaiser 6y ago
  Companies are in a hard spot here. Don't upgrade and you get blamed even if the software is very out of date. Upgrade automatically and other groups get mad. Seems like you need to default to auto update but have an opt out.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - magicalhippo 6y ago
    > Seems like you need to default to auto update but have an opt out. We have that. Our software auto-updates, but when you start our program you get a launcher where you can select one of the last five minor versions for each available major version. Typically the next major version is made immediately available and active in the test environment, while a "boss user" gates them in prod. When setting a new major version as active, the previous ones are still available for a long time, along with any potential new minor versions for those. This has made our life so much easier, since any critical issues can almost always be worked around by the user simply launching a previous version, either minor or possibly major. So we can be much more aggressive with pushing out changes, which our customers also appreciate. It's not perfect but works very well for us and our customers seem happy. It does require us being careful when making database schema changes, or similar potentially breaking changes. But a lot can be handled quite transparently in the database (using views typically) or through code, and our database upgrade tool can also migrate data as a last resort.
- airhead969 6y ago
  Join us or your API will stop functioning.
jerhewet 6y ago
Please don't upgrade ANYTHING without asking first. I am NOT your beta-tester.
- bigiain 6y ago
  Ummm, I have some bad news for you... (See also “other duties as required” in your job description...)
- coldtea 6y ago
  Well, big chance that you're not their paying customer either...
  - enumjorge 6y ago
    Docker derives a lot of its value from how widely it’s been adopted in the industry, which includes its free users.
    - coldtea 6y ago
      And kings derive a lot of their value from their subjects, but they can treat them like shit and still be kings.
- jchonphoenix 6y ago
  Your response is dripping with entitlement. You likely don't pay for Docker and do not provide any beneficial relationship to Docker. Why should they be beholden to your opinions? If they wanted to ship you buggy software, that's within their right. You then have the option to decide whether or not you want to use it. That's within your right.
  - king_magic 6y ago
    There's no reason to be rude here. Ever see the kinds of insane enterprise-wise nightmares that auto-upgrades with breaking changes cause? They aren't pretty.
sdfhbdf 6y ago
There should be (2020) added to the title
- CGamesPlay 6y ago
  This, especially because based on my experience with running Docker desktop yesterday, this issue should actually be closed. There's now a "Quit Docker Desktop" and a "Restart and Upgrade" (and a status icon) on the bar menu (append: I'm on a mac).
  - timmytokyo 6y ago
    Docker Desktop for Windows still auto-upgrades without asking you. Not sure about Mac. The fix is supposedly coming in the next release (sometime in April).
throwaway823882 6y ago
"But the whole goal of auto-upgrading is to avoid the spread versions, it's a mess to investigate when you have reports from 1 year old version, that's the main reason why we choose to do that." I see this all the time, especially in open source products. A vendor decides to screw over its users because the vendor wants less work and doesn't feel like finding a better solution. And they usually get away with it, because big open source projects are incumbents that are very hard not to use. If you make a product, please prioritize solving the user's problems and pain over your own. Not only is it the compassionate and ethical thing to do, but it also helps engender goodwill for your product. People often choose a product solely because of their feelings for it (branding 101).
- gugagore 6y ago
  You went from "open source products" to "open source projects" , and I'm confused about your point. Is Docker an example of both an open source project and product? > If you make a product, please prioritize solving the user's problems and pain over your own. I'm not sure I understand the context under which you want this prioritization. Just asking for clarification.
rubyist5eva 6y ago
shenanigans like this is why I switched all my projects to use Podman, docker is just trash software
DubiousPusher 6y ago
Isn't the widely accepted solution to this to just have a limited number of LTS versions?
- umvi 6y ago
  Yeah, I like the way Ubuntu handles it. Basically, if you come boo-hooing in Issues and you are using an ancient non-LTS version, you'll be asked to install an LTS (or latest) version first. That way you only have to maintain a tiny subset of your releases, and your users are incentivized to use LTS or make sure they are up to date.
- mariusmg 6y ago
  You have to support those LTS releases. Their solution is to update everyone to latest and only support that one.
gugagore 6y ago
https://github.com/docker/roadmap/issues/183#issuecomment-748871985 https://github.com/docker/roadmap/issues/183#issuecomment-74... > Blocking outgoing network connections to desktop.docker.com can keep you on on the functional 3.0.1 by not allowing the auto-upgrade to 'find' the broken 3.0.2 version, this can be used as a temporary patch. You'd need somethling like Little Snitch to achieve it, but at least you won't lose a Monday. I use Little Snitch, usually on "Alert Mode", and I almost breathe a sigh of relief whenever I block an automatic outgoing connection to an upgrade server. It can be distracting and annoying to block connections at a granularity to keep the application working correctly, and sometimes I get a bit fed up and just allow all connections, but usually temporarily. Since I even want to be consulted for outgoing network connections, you bet that I want to be consulted before a software upgrade!
f430 6y ago
Question, why do we use Docker?
- yepthatsreality 6y ago
  Brand recognition created from saturation of bloggers writing how-to guides about it.
- purerandomness 6y ago
  Vagrant could have easily won by supporting Linux containers, and improving the developer experience.
  - hda111 6y ago
    Vagrant is still being used. It’s only lacking good support for hyper V and hyper V images.
    - purerandomness 6y ago
      I know it's being used. The point is, it lost to Docker. Which is a shame.
qeternity 6y ago
Docker for Mac is a dumpster fire. We gave up on it a year ago. There are loads of hot-reloading dev-stack-in-the-cloud solutions nowadays that anyone who can avoid local Docker should. More performant, better battery life and keeps your crotch from igniting.
rattray 6y ago
If I were to start a company tomorrow, what should I use instead of Docker? Heroku and dev laptops' filesystems?
- yepthatsreality 6y ago
  FreeBSD
  - rattray 6y ago
    With VM's for local development? What to use for ensuring the right package versions are installed etc? Terraform?
    - bojo 6y ago
      I believe they were alluding to jails as the alternative here.
      - rattray 6y ago
        Docker solves a lot of problems. I don't want to use it, but I want an easy, cohesive to all those problems! Like, each type of application I have to run in my fleet needs the right environment, with proper settings, packages, etc. And when a developer at the company needs to work on that service locally, they need a prod-like env spun up quickly and simply that they can easily work in. There's many ways to do this, like "one prod box and ssh" but they all have tradeoffs...
        bojo 6y ago
        My team uses https://www.chef.io/products/chef-habitat/ https://www.chef.io/products/chef-habitat/ to solve what you explained there. Worth taking the time to go through if you want repeatable builds, runtimes, and environments (be they bare metal, VM, or even docker).
  - purerandomness 6y ago
lopatin 6y ago
I'm astonished by the pushback from the Docker devs on this. rflay, ThomasNegeli, and Nuru did heroic work by gently and thoroughly explaining why mandatory, automatic updates are unacceptable for a dev tool. I would not have been so patient. The fact that they had to hold the maintainers hands through this is disappointing. "it's a feature request not a bug" shows Stephen did not even understand the problem he introduced. Either that, or he didn't read all the comments before him.
- phendrenad2 6y ago
  This is how you get forked. They're risking the business on some dumb dark pattern here.
  - nvllsvm 6y ago
    Unfortunately not straight-forward with Docker Desktop as it's closed-source. Sure, underlying components are open source, but I've seen no other effort to glue them together in a cohesive, single-purpose package like Docker Desktop.
    - eyelidlessness 6y ago
      This is also the kind of thing that drives people to create the alternative.
  - kelnos 6y ago
    How is that a dark pattern? Are you going to say that Chrome and Firefox auto-updates are a dark pattern too? Keeping people on the latest version of your software has very clear benefits to both you and your users. Unfortunately, as we see here, it can also have downsides. Ultimately it's up to the developer to decide what trade off works best for them. Input from users is important, but it's not the users' decision.
- MattGaiser 6y ago
  I wonder if that discussion already occurred in Docker and now they are simply messengers executing something already decided. I've had the position of saying that something desired will not be done with the only thing I could honestly say without airing private disagreements being "reasons", as the person I was talking to knew I also didn't think it made sense. Deflecting with vague statements has also been a tactic I have used, hoping that they would not persist.
Swaglord333 6y ago
Amen
simias 6y ago
>But the whole goal of auto-upgrading is to avoid the spread versions, it's a mess to investigate when you have reports from 1 year old version, that's the main reason why we choose to do that. Why not just outright reject issues on outdated version of the software? Decide that you won't support versions older than x and roll with that. This way the users can consider that when they weigh the risks of updating. >For those with this pain right now: I think installing Docker Desktop 2.5.0.1 is the only solution. Well that sure backfired.
- kazen44 6y ago
  > Why not just outright reject issues on outdated version of the software? Decide that you won't support versions older than x and roll with that. This way the users can consider that when they weigh the risks of updating. i don' t understand why this is not something more companies do. Most operational systems (networking equipment, server equipment etc) have release cycles, in which current version -2 is the usual schedule in regards to support. Or just do it the way openBSD does it, and only support the last two releases of the software.
  - eyelidlessness 6y ago
    I’m a fan of this approach (or variations with a LTS schedule). But it’s worth noting that it’s also widely criticized depending on context. For instance, Apple has a similar support schedule for its various OSes, and that draws a ton of nerd ire because it’s frequently interpreted as “planned obsolescence”.
- aidenn0 6y ago
  > Why not just outright reject issues on outdated version of the software? Decide that you won't support versions older than x and roll with that. This way the users can consider that when they weigh the risks of updating. In my experience the overwhelming majority of bug reports do not include the version.
  - namrog84 6y ago
    Then close issue as "needs more info" until people do? Or make it a required field or highly emphasized in bug template.
renewiltord 6y ago
Ah, I understand the devs here, evergreening means you don't have support spread. But it's a dev tool and pinning is a crucial feature for devs. Looks like a PM somewhere learned a crucial product lesson today.
2OEH8eoCRo0 6y ago
alias docker=podman
- andoriyu 6y ago
  Please read beyond title. Product in place is not Docker, but Docker for Mac. A product that can't be replaced by podman.
- hda111 6y ago
  That’s the solution. But it’s not as easy to install on Windows/WSL. Thus it’s nowhere near being accepted. They need a simple .exe one can run. Currently it’s explaining a complicated install with 15 steps vs one click on Docker Desktop EXE. So podman will never be accepted in workspaces.
olivierduval 6y ago
What's surprising me most is how much the devs/IT guys are considering that the computer of their users belong to them and that they can choose to do whatever they want because they write the software !!!! How is the "auto-updater" different from any malware calling remote website or mining bitcoins???? In both cases, the dev decided what must happen with the users computer without its consent ! Even Windows allow to disable updates...
devinrhode2 6y ago
I understand where the docker devs are coming from. Is it possible to download docker source from github.com, git checkout some version tag, build, and viola?
- danaliv 6y ago
  No, Docker Desktop is closed source, and if you download an older version it auto-updates.
ljm 6y ago
> Our thought was that if it makes sense for GitHub, it makes sense for us lol I'm sorry, but what? this is total amateur hour I'm in total disbelief - this isn't how you deliver software.
passivate 6y ago
There is never a perfect way of resolving differences of opinion on a project. I see both viewpoints as valid (not an invested party here, just an observer). But in the end, I would give the maintainer of the project veto power over feedback. It seems like this is an attribute of their design they don't want to budge on.
austinshea 6y ago
This is wildly inappropriate behavior.
ping_pong 6y ago
Wow. Autoupgrading is such a rookie mistake that I'm shocked that anyone at Docker would approve this tactic. Auto-upgrading and breaking environments is a sure-fire way of sowing deep seeds of mistrust and would force lots of companies to move off Docker. That's a decision that needs to be completely reversed, and the executives that approved that need to be dismissed immediately.
- steve_taylor 6y ago
  You’re talking about the same group that put Docker desktop behind a login wall. I’m certainly not surprised.
jiehong 6y ago
Docker for Desktop has no equivalent, and that’s true. Unless you’re on a Linux, where podman and podman compose _almost_ are an equivalent. But then, you can easily rollback a version on most distributions, and you don’t have the auto update in the first place.
prpl 6y ago
At some level, this is a tension between continuous delivery and incremental updates and burden of support. I think they are correct in the assertion that you get version explosion, but possibly there is a middle ground which is, before you file a bug, have you tried updating first (aka turning it off and on again) and having a policy of ignoring/closing bugs of old versions as un-reproducible. Probably a no-win situation overall for the dev team, however.
the8472 6y ago
On my system docker comes from the package manager, which doesn't even run unless I explicitly trigger it. Is not using the GUI bundle not an option for people who need more control? On windows one could even use docker in WSL2.
userbinator 6y ago
Sorry about it, we rushed a bit the last update and introduce a severe bug. But the whole goal of auto-upgrading is to avoid the spread versions Maybe you wouldn't have so many versions if you slowed down and actually took the time to make sure each version you do eventually release was more stable...? With a lot of "modern" software, I feel like it's not just "move fast and break things" anymore, it's "keep moving and breaking things". In particular, certain types of software like browsers and OS invoke feelings of dread upon each update: "what did they break/what user hostile crap or other unwanted changes did they try to sneak in this time?" Docker is, like a lot of other software, "foundational" in that its error-free operation is relied upon by many. How can developers build anything reliable if the foundations are shaky? Maybe that's partly why retrocomputing is so popular. With something like a C64 you never have to worry about the platform changing, so you can spend all of your energy on solving the problem you had in mind, instead of the ones created by the platform trying to shift under you.
- edoceo 6y ago
  It's like we learned nothing from web-framework churn and decided to go levels deeper. This time will be different (tm)
  - alpaca128 6y ago
    I don't know how developers can look at the mess Microsoft causes with forced Windows 10 updates and think it's not only fine but they need to add another layer so that when the OS auto-updates without asking it might kick off a chain reaction of user applications wrecking themselves recursively. At least we don't have to worry about a Skynet I guess.
- 60secz 6y ago
  Move fast and break everything. Some version spread is desirable.
- rlayton2 6y ago
  Great points. "Move fast and break things" is for new companies that don't have people relying on them. People who use this saying to keep moving forward should be aware of the fact that Facebook no longer use this (). I've heard "Move fast with reliable infrastructure". In other words, Facebook invest massive amounts of money to allow them to test and deploy new features without breaking the whole site. If you don't want to make that investment, you don't get to move fast without breaking things. I'm not in Facebook, above information is from a podcast. If you are from Facebook, I'd love your input
pvorb 6y ago
Google Chrome has been using auto upgrades for years and I haven't heard any complains about that. I'd argue it's also a really important tool in a dev's toolkit.
- rossdavidh 6y ago
  I suppose it's because, while not every version is great, it hasn't (that I am aware of) totally broken Chrome for any significant chunk of their users. It may be that is due to a bigger budget for QA at Google, or perhaps the intrinsic challenge of the two tools, but for whatever reason it hasn't happened (that I know of). If it did, I think there would be plenty of squawking.
  - kps 6y ago
    Chrome does several things right. (Disclaimer: I used to work on ChromeOS/Chrome, but this is just my opinion (but you can have it if you want).) - A beta stream that's one release ahead, which tends to be selected by web developers and other whiny^H^H^H^H^H demanding users. - Gradual release of new versions, starting with something like 1% of users, then 10%, then 100%. - Significant changes are behind run-time flags (chrome://flags), and ship disabled by default. After one or often several releases, where it can be optionally enabled, it becomes enabled by default, with the ability to back out if something goes wrong. Finally, only once it's been successfully enabled for several releases, the flag and the old code can be removed. - Nobody minds if a feature doesn't make it in to a release; there'll be another one in month or two. There's no pressure to cram in something half-baked to meet a deadline.
mjgs 6y ago
This sort of thing is the exact reason why I have been staying away from Docker for my projects. Having one company be totally in control of runtime environments just isn’t robust. There are just too many scenarios where some issue they face internally could cause a massive disruption. And when I looked I didn’t find any Docker alternatives, so I just stuck with plain old Bash scripts, rsync, running the app in Ubuntu.
- BelenusMordred 6y ago
  Linux containers with LXD doesn't fit the need? I use them for everything where I can. Years of docker in production has burnt me out. I've come to loathe its design and anti-patterns. There's also just plain ridiculous stuff like making people signup for an account to download it on windows/mac
- mjgs 6y ago
  > Linux containers with LXD doesn't fit the need? It might do, I haven’t had the time to investigate. It was 3-4 years ago when I had to make the decision. I remember there was some open source tools mentioned on some websites, but I certainly didn’t get the impression it was very easy to get it working. I guess that was the appeal of Docker, they had done all the difficult part and created a product. But then it’s the ‘all eggs in one basket problem’, and other stuff you mentioned like the signing up for accounts etc. I had so many other things to learn and build at the time, that the extra complication of containers didn’t make sense. If I was in a situation where I was building out a fresh site I would for sure give LXD another look.
jmpeax 6y ago
Isn't autoupdate the antithesis of what Docker represents?
biglost 6y ago
snapd needs this feature too (let me choose when and what to update on MY machine)

280 points by timmytokyo 6y ago

Auto-updates by default are great, but having no way to opt out of auto-updates (or at least, an update to a given known-bad version)? That's pretty bad.

akvadrako 6y ago
Agreed. For example iOS and stock Android, terrible designs.
- anaerobicover 6y ago
  You can opt out of auto-update on iOS (for both individual apps and the OS).
  - akvadrako 6y ago
    Not really - it will keep bugging you to update.
rightbyte 6y ago
Why would you want auto-updates though. It just breaks your stuff. Grandmas' or devs' alike. I feel users rarely benifits. But sure having apps with user hostile functions being pushed without a way to say no is convenient for the responsible at those places. Atleast when you get a prompt you know why stuff fails afterward. Debugging silent auto update issues is a nightmare.
- thitcanh 6y ago
  Really? Autoupdates are why we don’t have to code for Chrome 12 today. Autoupdates are awesome, just not for business, sometimes.
  - sjwright 6y ago
    Browsers have the benefit of massive interest in their beta releases. This substantially reduces the number of breaking changes which make it into auto-updated versions. Perhaps Docker could learn from this and only auto-update to versions which have been used by a large audience for N weeks with no regression reports.
- rattray 6y ago
  On average, updates make stuff better. Getting them automatically and quickly is, on average, a good thing. Only when that becomes untrue for a sustained period of time should you turn off updates, but at that point, you're just sticking to a single pinned version until you're able to switch to a competitor. Vendors who just keep pushing user-hostile shit should lose customers, not (just) updaters.
  - rightbyte 6y ago
    Ye well I am fine with auto updates as long as it is possible to disable (without hacks or esoteric config file settings in GUI apps). The convinence of having the computer click "install latest version" in a prompt for you is minimal. I think it should be the user's choice. This trend in slow rollouts to see what breaks and using users for beta testing is annoying.
- capableweb 6y ago
  I don't think what you're saying is necessarily true. Browsers for example are very resilient at this point, and seem to handle auto-updates just fine. Worst case scenario you can use a different browser for a couple of hours. The upside is that auto-updating works in most cases and users hardly notice, while you're shipping security fixes straight to them. With developer tools it's different. Your tool stops working and suddenly you cannot work. You often can't just change the tool either, without having to rewrite stuff. For this, it's necessary that versions stay the same until we're ready to upgrade. Same goes for libraries you're using and so on.
  - nitrogen 6y ago
    Browser updates break addons and workflows on a regular basis. Google for how to do something like add a shortcut to a website to the Android homescreen from Firefox, and chances are all the tutorials you find will be out of date.
- TylerE 6y ago
  Seems like you've got a bit of reverse surviorship bias here. You don't notice all the updates that are flawless.
- egypturnash 6y ago
  The deliriously unhip Wordpress installation running my website has auto-updates for minor versions turned on. Major updates still require my intervention. It pretty much always just... works. New exploits just get patched out. Of course, with the exception of the new "Gutenberg" editor, WP has always been ultra conservative in terms of major usage change.
- benmller313 6y ago
  If updates to some software "Just breaks your stuff", you have bigger problems with the software than the decision to auto update or not.

brnt 6y ago

Try podman, I really like it.

alibarber 6y ago
I’ve also been using it and found it to be really good. Has helped me understand much more about containers and I’m a fan of its approach. Buildah is also a powerful tool.
kevinmgranger 6y ago
How does that help users on macOS?
- SilverRed 6y ago
  Docker does not run on macos. It runs in a VM on mac. Podman also runs in a vm on macos.
  - kevinmgranger 6y ago
    podman-machine is deprecated and Vagrant is recommended instead.
- broknbottle 6y ago
  https://developers.redhat.com/blog/2020/02/12/podman-for-macos-sort-of/ https://developers.redhat.com/blog/2020/02/12/podman-for-mac...
  - mikey_p 6y ago
    If you click through you'll see that podman-machine is deprecated and they now just instruct users to use Vagrant.
heavyset_go 6y ago
Last time I tried it, particularly using it for a Docker Compose replacement, it certainly wasn't the drop-in replacement that had feature parity with Docker that it was promoted as.

aftbit 6y ago

It looks like they've listened and decided to add a prompt before updating: https://github.com/docker/roadmap/issues/183#issuecomment-797412882 https://github.com/docker/roadmap/issues/183#issuecomment-79... Personally I don't see why auto-update is the job of the software... why not just use a system-wide package manager? I suppose on Mac or Windows, that means using the Store, which heavily restricts what software can do. How shortsighted...

wlesieutre 6y ago
Outside the Store, most Mac software uses Sparkle for updates, which gives you a nice UI with patchnotes and a choice to update or not (or even opt-in to automatic updates if you're feeling brave): https://sparkle-project.org/ https://sparkle-project.org/
- thih9 6y ago
  It looks like this is the framework used by Docker Desktop too [1]. Perhaps they enabled auto updates by default? (I wouldn't know, I don't have any experience with Mac projects.) [1]: https://github.com/docker/roadmap/issues/183#issuecomment-797412882 https://github.com/docker/roadmap/issues/183#issuecomment-79...
  - yellowapple 6y ago
    Yeah, the problem is that Docker Desktop apparently downloads updates automatically in the background, and Sparkle by default apparently wants to kick off the install as soon as the download finishes. Which of course punts the concern from "Docker Desktop is installing potentially-broken updates without my consent" to "Docker Desktop is consuming network bandwidth - which might very well be metered - without my consent" - that is, hardly an improvement. If the Docker folks could not be actively hostile to user experience for two seconds, that would be great :)
- haswell 6y ago
  Interestingly, they appear to be using Sparkle [0]. Oddly, stephen-turner claims that Sparkle is part of the reason it's taking some time to fix the issue. Direct quote: > As said above, we're working on this: we're planning to download the update in the background and then give the user the choice whether to update to it on next start. It's taken a little longer than we hoped because the Sparkle framework we use on Mac doesn't expect that workflow: once the update has been downloaded, it wants to apply it without confirmation at next shutdown. We are keen to retain the invisible download but give the user a choice whether to apply it later. It's hard to understand why they're struggling with a problem that seems to be solved by every other app that uses Sparkle... - [0] https://github.com/docker/roadmap/issues/183#issuecomment-797412882 https://github.com/docker/roadmap/issues/183#issuecomment-79...

slig 6y ago

Has version 3 improved docker on macOS in any way?

purerandomness 6y ago
No. We're still on the last stable version (2.5.0.1) Every version after that either doesn't start [1] or makes random containers miraculously stop working. The 2.x version has your CPU burning, but that seems to persist in 3.x [2]. I stopped trying after they pulled in the auto-upgrade feature. Our team has no time playing bug-hunt easter egg at random times. I honestly don't comprehend how this software gained such a wide adoption on Macs. Docker on Linux works flawlessly meanwhile. [1] https://github.com/docker/for-mac/issues/5146 https://github.com/docker/for-mac/issues/5146 [2] https://github.com/docker/for-mac/issues/5116 https://github.com/docker/for-mac/issues/5116
smoldesu 6y ago
No, and it's very likely that Docker may never improve very much on MacOS. There was already no shortage of trouble on x86 MacOS, I doubt the switch to ARM (and ostensibly, Big Sur) will make things any easier.
Nextgrid 6y ago
They now have an Electron-based config UI. That's obviously a big improvement.

jlv2 6y ago

This response totally misses the point. "Sorry about it, we rushed a bit the last update and introduce a severe bug. I'll try to fix it today and if I cannot, rollback last grpcfuse patches."

elliotpage 6y ago
An addendum by another developer later on doubly misses the point: https://github.com/docker/roadmap/issues/183#issuecomment-750124955 https://github.com/docker/roadmap/issues/183#issuecomment-75...
- dmatech 6y ago
  It's common to be defensive with these sorts of things. I wish people would instead be inquisitive And ask about potential downsides vs. upsides, but it's much easier to respond that way when you feel like your job or status isn't at risk.
Zealotux 6y ago
It feels like an habit of the Docker team, they always try to defend their anti-user decisions with vague and uninspired corporate bs. They're barely trying. Another classic: https://github.com/docker/docker.github.io/issues/6910 https://github.com/docker/docker.github.io/issues/6910
- p1necone 6y ago
  Wowww: https://github.com/docker/docker.github.io/issues/6910#issuecomment-589179980 https://github.com/docker/docker.github.io/issues/6910#issue... What the hell does "Docker's new direction to go back to its roots and focus on developer tooling" even mean? Docker is developer tooling, that's the whole product. That's not "going back to your roots" that's just doing your damn job.
  - aidenn0 6y ago
    Is it developer tooling or deployment tooling?

Animats 6y ago

Resistance is futile. You will be upgraded.

MattGaiser 6y ago
Companies are in a hard spot here. Don't upgrade and you get blamed even if the software is very out of date. Upgrade automatically and other groups get mad. Seems like you need to default to auto update but have an opt out.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- magicalhippo 6y ago
  > Seems like you need to default to auto update but have an opt out. We have that. Our software auto-updates, but when you start our program you get a launcher where you can select one of the last five minor versions for each available major version. Typically the next major version is made immediately available and active in the test environment, while a "boss user" gates them in prod. When setting a new major version as active, the previous ones are still available for a long time, along with any potential new minor versions for those. This has made our life so much easier, since any critical issues can almost always be worked around by the user simply launching a previous version, either minor or possibly major. So we can be much more aggressive with pushing out changes, which our customers also appreciate. It's not perfect but works very well for us and our customers seem happy. It does require us being careful when making database schema changes, or similar potentially breaking changes. But a lot can be handled quite transparently in the database (using views typically) or through code, and our database upgrade tool can also migrate data as a last resort.
airhead969 6y ago
Join us or your API will stop functioning.

jerhewet 6y ago

Please don't upgrade ANYTHING without asking first. I am NOT your beta-tester.

bigiain 6y ago
Ummm, I have some bad news for you... (See also “other duties as required” in your job description...)
coldtea 6y ago
Well, big chance that you're not their paying customer either...
- enumjorge 6y ago
  Docker derives a lot of its value from how widely it’s been adopted in the industry, which includes its free users.
  - coldtea 6y ago
    And kings derive a lot of their value from their subjects, but they can treat them like shit and still be kings.
jchonphoenix 6y ago
Your response is dripping with entitlement. You likely don't pay for Docker and do not provide any beneficial relationship to Docker. Why should they be beholden to your opinions? If they wanted to ship you buggy software, that's within their right. You then have the option to decide whether or not you want to use it. That's within your right.
- king_magic 6y ago
  There's no reason to be rude here. Ever see the kinds of insane enterprise-wise nightmares that auto-upgrades with breaking changes cause? They aren't pretty.

sdfhbdf 6y ago

There should be (2020) added to the title

CGamesPlay 6y ago
This, especially because based on my experience with running Docker desktop yesterday, this issue should actually be closed. There's now a "Quit Docker Desktop" and a "Restart and Upgrade" (and a status icon) on the bar menu (append: I'm on a mac).
- timmytokyo 6y ago
  Docker Desktop for Windows still auto-upgrades without asking you. Not sure about Mac. The fix is supposedly coming in the next release (sometime in April).

throwaway823882 6y ago

"But the whole goal of auto-upgrading is to avoid the spread versions, it's a mess to investigate when you have reports from 1 year old version, that's the main reason why we choose to do that." I see this all the time, especially in open source products. A vendor decides to screw over its users because the vendor wants less work and doesn't feel like finding a better solution. And they usually get away with it, because big open source projects are incumbents that are very hard not to use. If you make a product, please prioritize solving the user's problems and pain over your own. Not only is it the compassionate and ethical thing to do, but it also helps engender goodwill for your product. People often choose a product solely because of their feelings for it (branding 101).

gugagore 6y ago
You went from "open source products" to "open source projects" , and I'm confused about your point. Is Docker an example of both an open source project and product? > If you make a product, please prioritize solving the user's problems and pain over your own. I'm not sure I understand the context under which you want this prioritization. Just asking for clarification.

rubyist5eva 6y ago

shenanigans like this is why I switched all my projects to use Podman, docker is just trash software

DubiousPusher 6y ago

Isn't the widely accepted solution to this to just have a limited number of LTS versions?

umvi 6y ago
Yeah, I like the way Ubuntu handles it. Basically, if you come boo-hooing in Issues and you are using an ancient non-LTS version, you'll be asked to install an LTS (or latest) version first. That way you only have to maintain a tiny subset of your releases, and your users are incentivized to use LTS or make sure they are up to date.
mariusmg 6y ago
You have to support those LTS releases. Their solution is to update everyone to latest and only support that one.

gugagore 6y ago

https://github.com/docker/roadmap/issues/183#issuecomment-748871985 https://github.com/docker/roadmap/issues/183#issuecomment-74... > Blocking outgoing network connections to desktop.docker.com can keep you on on the functional 3.0.1 by not allowing the auto-upgrade to 'find' the broken 3.0.2 version, this can be used as a temporary patch. You'd need somethling like Little Snitch to achieve it, but at least you won't lose a Monday. I use Little Snitch, usually on "Alert Mode", and I almost breathe a sigh of relief whenever I block an automatic outgoing connection to an upgrade server. It can be distracting and annoying to block connections at a granularity to keep the application working correctly, and sometimes I get a bit fed up and just allow all connections, but usually temporarily. Since I even want to be consulted for outgoing network connections, you bet that I want to be consulted before a software upgrade!

f430 6y ago

Question, why do we use Docker?

yepthatsreality 6y ago
Brand recognition created from saturation of bloggers writing how-to guides about it.
purerandomness 6y ago
Vagrant could have easily won by supporting Linux containers, and improving the developer experience.
- hda111 6y ago
  Vagrant is still being used. It’s only lacking good support for hyper V and hyper V images.
  - purerandomness 6y ago
    I know it's being used. The point is, it lost to Docker. Which is a shame.

qeternity 6y ago

Docker for Mac is a dumpster fire. We gave up on it a year ago. There are loads of hot-reloading dev-stack-in-the-cloud solutions nowadays that anyone who can avoid local Docker should. More performant, better battery life and keeps your crotch from igniting.

rattray 6y ago

If I were to start a company tomorrow, what should I use instead of Docker? Heroku and dev laptops' filesystems?

yepthatsreality 6y ago
FreeBSD
- rattray 6y ago
  With VM's for local development? What to use for ensuring the right package versions are installed etc? Terraform?
  - bojo 6y ago
    I believe they were alluding to jails as the alternative here.
    - rattray 6y ago
      Docker solves a lot of problems. I don't want to use it, but I want an easy, cohesive to all those problems! Like, each type of application I have to run in my fleet needs the right environment, with proper settings, packages, etc. And when a developer at the company needs to work on that service locally, they need a prod-like env spun up quickly and simply that they can easily work in. There's many ways to do this, like "one prod box and ssh" but they all have tradeoffs...
      - bojo 6y ago
        My team uses https://www.chef.io/products/chef-habitat/ https://www.chef.io/products/chef-habitat/ to solve what you explained there. Worth taking the time to go through if you want repeatable builds, runtimes, and environments (be they bare metal, VM, or even docker).
- purerandomness 6y ago

lopatin 6y ago

I'm astonished by the pushback from the Docker devs on this. rflay, ThomasNegeli, and Nuru did heroic work by gently and thoroughly explaining why mandatory, automatic updates are unacceptable for a dev tool. I would not have been so patient. The fact that they had to hold the maintainers hands through this is disappointing. "it's a feature request not a bug" shows Stephen did not even understand the problem he introduced. Either that, or he didn't read all the comments before him.

phendrenad2 6y ago
This is how you get forked. They're risking the business on some dumb dark pattern here.
- nvllsvm 6y ago
  Unfortunately not straight-forward with Docker Desktop as it's closed-source. Sure, underlying components are open source, but I've seen no other effort to glue them together in a cohesive, single-purpose package like Docker Desktop.
  - eyelidlessness 6y ago
    This is also the kind of thing that drives people to create the alternative.
- kelnos 6y ago
  How is that a dark pattern? Are you going to say that Chrome and Firefox auto-updates are a dark pattern too? Keeping people on the latest version of your software has very clear benefits to both you and your users. Unfortunately, as we see here, it can also have downsides. Ultimately it's up to the developer to decide what trade off works best for them. Input from users is important, but it's not the users' decision.
MattGaiser 6y ago
I wonder if that discussion already occurred in Docker and now they are simply messengers executing something already decided. I've had the position of saying that something desired will not be done with the only thing I could honestly say without airing private disagreements being "reasons", as the person I was talking to knew I also didn't think it made sense. Deflecting with vague statements has also been a tactic I have used, hoping that they would not persist.

Swaglord333 6y ago

Amen

simias 6y ago

>But the whole goal of auto-upgrading is to avoid the spread versions, it's a mess to investigate when you have reports from 1 year old version, that's the main reason why we choose to do that. Why not just outright reject issues on outdated version of the software? Decide that you won't support versions older than x and roll with that. This way the users can consider that when they weigh the risks of updating. >For those with this pain right now: I think installing Docker Desktop 2.5.0.1 is the only solution. Well that sure backfired.

kazen44 6y ago
> Why not just outright reject issues on outdated version of the software? Decide that you won't support versions older than x and roll with that. This way the users can consider that when they weigh the risks of updating. i don' t understand why this is not something more companies do. Most operational systems (networking equipment, server equipment etc) have release cycles, in which current version -2 is the usual schedule in regards to support. Or just do it the way openBSD does it, and only support the last two releases of the software.
- eyelidlessness 6y ago
  I’m a fan of this approach (or variations with a LTS schedule). But it’s worth noting that it’s also widely criticized depending on context. For instance, Apple has a similar support schedule for its various OSes, and that draws a ton of nerd ire because it’s frequently interpreted as “planned obsolescence”.
aidenn0 6y ago
> Why not just outright reject issues on outdated version of the software? Decide that you won't support versions older than x and roll with that. This way the users can consider that when they weigh the risks of updating. In my experience the overwhelming majority of bug reports do not include the version.
- namrog84 6y ago
  Then close issue as "needs more info" until people do? Or make it a required field or highly emphasized in bug template.

renewiltord 6y ago

Ah, I understand the devs here, evergreening means you don't have support spread. But it's a dev tool and pinning is a crucial feature for devs. Looks like a PM somewhere learned a crucial product lesson today.

2OEH8eoCRo0 6y ago

alias docker=podman

andoriyu 6y ago
Please read beyond title. Product in place is not Docker, but Docker for Mac. A product that can't be replaced by podman.
hda111 6y ago
That’s the solution. But it’s not as easy to install on Windows/WSL. Thus it’s nowhere near being accepted. They need a simple .exe one can run. Currently it’s explaining a complicated install with 15 steps vs one click on Docker Desktop EXE. So podman will never be accepted in workspaces.

olivierduval 6y ago

What's surprising me most is how much the devs/IT guys are considering that the computer of their users belong to them and that they can choose to do whatever they want because they write the software !!!! How is the "auto-updater" different from any malware calling remote website or mining bitcoins???? In both cases, the dev decided what must happen with the users computer without its consent ! Even Windows allow to disable updates...

devinrhode2 6y ago

I understand where the docker devs are coming from. Is it possible to download docker source from github.com, git checkout some version tag, build, and viola?

danaliv 6y ago
No, Docker Desktop is closed source, and if you download an older version it auto-updates.

ljm 6y ago

> Our thought was that if it makes sense for GitHub, it makes sense for us lol I'm sorry, but what? this is total amateur hour I'm in total disbelief - this isn't how you deliver software.

passivate 6y ago

There is never a perfect way of resolving differences of opinion on a project. I see both viewpoints as valid (not an invested party here, just an observer). But in the end, I would give the maintainer of the project veto power over feedback. It seems like this is an attribute of their design they don't want to budge on.

austinshea 6y ago

This is wildly inappropriate behavior.

ping_pong 6y ago

Wow. Autoupgrading is such a rookie mistake that I'm shocked that anyone at Docker would approve this tactic. Auto-upgrading and breaking environments is a sure-fire way of sowing deep seeds of mistrust and would force lots of companies to move off Docker. That's a decision that needs to be completely reversed, and the executives that approved that need to be dismissed immediately.

steve_taylor 6y ago
You’re talking about the same group that put Docker desktop behind a login wall. I’m certainly not surprised.

jiehong 6y ago

Docker for Desktop has no equivalent, and that’s true. Unless you’re on a Linux, where podman and podman compose _almost_ are an equivalent. But then, you can easily rollback a version on most distributions, and you don’t have the auto update in the first place.

prpl 6y ago

At some level, this is a tension between continuous delivery and incremental updates and burden of support. I think they are correct in the assertion that you get version explosion, but possibly there is a middle ground which is, before you file a bug, have you tried updating first (aka turning it off and on again) and having a policy of ignoring/closing bugs of old versions as un-reproducible. Probably a no-win situation overall for the dev team, however.

the8472 6y ago

On my system docker comes from the package manager, which doesn't even run unless I explicitly trigger it. Is not using the GUI bundle not an option for people who need more control? On windows one could even use docker in WSL2.

userbinator 6y ago

Sorry about it, we rushed a bit the last update and introduce a severe bug. But the whole goal of auto-upgrading is to avoid the spread versions Maybe you wouldn't have so many versions if you slowed down and actually took the time to make sure each version you do eventually release was more stable...? With a lot of "modern" software, I feel like it's not just "move fast and break things" anymore, it's "keep moving and breaking things". In particular, certain types of software like browsers and OS invoke feelings of dread upon each update: "what did they break/what user hostile crap or other unwanted changes did they try to sneak in this time?" Docker is, like a lot of other software, "foundational" in that its error-free operation is relied upon by many. How can developers build anything reliable if the foundations are shaky? Maybe that's partly why retrocomputing is so popular. With something like a C64 you never have to worry about the platform changing, so you can spend all of your energy on solving the problem you had in mind, instead of the ones created by the platform trying to shift under you.

edoceo 6y ago
It's like we learned nothing from web-framework churn and decided to go levels deeper. This time will be different (tm)
- alpaca128 6y ago
  I don't know how developers can look at the mess Microsoft causes with forced Windows 10 updates and think it's not only fine but they need to add another layer so that when the OS auto-updates without asking it might kick off a chain reaction of user applications wrecking themselves recursively. At least we don't have to worry about a Skynet I guess.
60secz 6y ago
Move fast and break everything. Some version spread is desirable.
rlayton2 6y ago
Great points. "Move fast and break things" is for new companies that don't have people relying on them. People who use this saying to keep moving forward should be aware of the fact that Facebook no longer use this (). I've heard "Move fast with reliable infrastructure". In other words, Facebook invest massive amounts of money to allow them to test and deploy new features without breaking the whole site. If you don't want to make that investment, you don't get to move fast without breaking things. I'm not in Facebook, above information is from a podcast. If you are from Facebook, I'd love your input

pvorb 6y ago

Google Chrome has been using auto upgrades for years and I haven't heard any complains about that. I'd argue it's also a really important tool in a dev's toolkit.

rossdavidh 6y ago
I suppose it's because, while not every version is great, it hasn't (that I am aware of) totally broken Chrome for any significant chunk of their users. It may be that is due to a bigger budget for QA at Google, or perhaps the intrinsic challenge of the two tools, but for whatever reason it hasn't happened (that I know of). If it did, I think there would be plenty of squawking.
- kps 6y ago
  Chrome does several things right. (Disclaimer: I used to work on ChromeOS/Chrome, but this is just my opinion (but you can have it if you want).) - A beta stream that's one release ahead, which tends to be selected by web developers and other whiny^H^H^H^H^H demanding users. - Gradual release of new versions, starting with something like 1% of users, then 10%, then 100%. - Significant changes are behind run-time flags (chrome://flags), and ship disabled by default. After one or often several releases, where it can be optionally enabled, it becomes enabled by default, with the ability to back out if something goes wrong. Finally, only once it's been successfully enabled for several releases, the flag and the old code can be removed. - Nobody minds if a feature doesn't make it in to a release; there'll be another one in month or two. There's no pressure to cram in something half-baked to meet a deadline.

mjgs 6y ago

This sort of thing is the exact reason why I have been staying away from Docker for my projects. Having one company be totally in control of runtime environments just isn’t robust. There are just too many scenarios where some issue they face internally could cause a massive disruption. And when I looked I didn’t find any Docker alternatives, so I just stuck with plain old Bash scripts, rsync, running the app in Ubuntu.

BelenusMordred 6y ago
Linux containers with LXD doesn't fit the need? I use them for everything where I can. Years of docker in production has burnt me out. I've come to loathe its design and anti-patterns. There's also just plain ridiculous stuff like making people signup for an account to download it on windows/mac
mjgs 6y ago
> Linux containers with LXD doesn't fit the need? It might do, I haven’t had the time to investigate. It was 3-4 years ago when I had to make the decision. I remember there was some open source tools mentioned on some websites, but I certainly didn’t get the impression it was very easy to get it working. I guess that was the appeal of Docker, they had done all the difficult part and created a product. But then it’s the ‘all eggs in one basket problem’, and other stuff you mentioned like the signing up for accounts etc. I had so many other things to learn and build at the time, that the extra complication of containers didn’t make sense. If I was in a situation where I was building out a fresh site I would for sure give LXD another look.

jmpeax 6y ago

Isn't autoupdate the antithesis of what Docker represents?

biglost 6y ago

snapd needs this feature too (let me choose when and what to update on MY machine)