5 ms·

Staying away from it is still not the best strategy - at least learn and play with it to understand its strengths and weaknesses. > it seems to give a lot of e

by judge2020 5y ago

Staying away from it is still not the best strategy - at least learn and play with it to understand its strengths and weaknesses. > it seems to give a lot of engineers into thinking they know infra when they really don't Maybe, but technology changes over time - I don’t see many new projects choosing VMware over docker/OCI for new infrastructure deployment since you usually don’t need a full VM for applocations that just need isolation and easy static deployments.

ramraj07 5y ago
I suppose my premise is that engineers often delude themselves into thinking that they know it well enough to implement docker when they dont. Id much rather prefer that the regular developers focus on the coding and leave those decisions to actual devops folks who can focus on getting this stuff right. But the simplicity of dockerfile lulls many into thinking if they run something with it it's production ready.
- lvncelot 5y ago
  Doesn't that run counter to what devops actually should be? I know that in practice, this split is what happens at companies, but we should work to close that rift, not widen it.
  - kijin 5y ago
    Whatever devops is supposed to be, it shouldn't involve relying on a tool whose security characteristics the team does not fully understand. If requiring such knowledge results in widening a pre-existing rift, so be it.
    - lvncelot 5y ago
      That's true, and something that often gets lost in the acceleration of "devops culture". But, in my opinion, the consequence then should be to try to not use Docker at all, and look for alternatives (like Podman) instead of just taking control from the dev team.
latch 5y ago
> Staying away from it is still not the best strategy There's a whole generation of sysadmins that use docker so that they can stay away from foundational knowledge. We interview experienced devops who do not know/understand how to build basic packages from source (e.g. they don't understand the ./configure, make, make install chain) and who only have basic knowledge of the underlying operating system.
- eru 5y ago
  To be honest, I know how to type `./configure`, `make` and `make install`. And I know more about Gnu Make than I would admit in a job interview (for fear of someone expecting me to work with Make). But so far, life has been too short for me to waste my time on Gnu Autoconf. And I don't feel guilty about this, or like someone who doesn't know fundamentals. Autoconf is by all accounts a horrible system. Gnu Make ain't much better. So I can't fault people for trying to avoid this mess.
  - dmix 5y ago
    All software is fundamentally helping deal with abstractions as this.
    - eru 5y ago
      Build systems in general can be ok, or even elegant and fun. Autoconf is just really terrible.
      - arp242 5y ago
        Autoconf is one of those programs that solved real problems when it was created, in a way that was actually fairly reasonable at the time too. There's a reason it became so popular. But it's now 30 years later, and what was reasonable then is a liability now. Sendmail is another great example of this phenomenon.
        eru 5y ago
pjmlp 5y ago
We did exactly that last year.

ramraj07 5y ago

I suppose my premise is that engineers often delude themselves into thinking that they know it well enough to implement docker when they dont. Id much rather prefer that the regular developers focus on the coding and leave those decisions to actual devops folks who can focus on getting this stuff right. But the simplicity of dockerfile lulls many into thinking if they run something with it it's production ready.

lvncelot 5y ago
Doesn't that run counter to what devops actually should be? I know that in practice, this split is what happens at companies, but we should work to close that rift, not widen it.
- kijin 5y ago
  Whatever devops is supposed to be, it shouldn't involve relying on a tool whose security characteristics the team does not fully understand. If requiring such knowledge results in widening a pre-existing rift, so be it.
  - lvncelot 5y ago
    That's true, and something that often gets lost in the acceleration of "devops culture". But, in my opinion, the consequence then should be to try to not use Docker at all, and look for alternatives (like Podman) instead of just taking control from the dev team.

latch 5y ago

> Staying away from it is still not the best strategy There's a whole generation of sysadmins that use docker so that they can stay away from foundational knowledge. We interview experienced devops who do not know/understand how to build basic packages from source (e.g. they don't understand the ./configure, make, make install chain) and who only have basic knowledge of the underlying operating system.

eru 5y ago
To be honest, I know how to type `./configure`, `make` and `make install`. And I know more about Gnu Make than I would admit in a job interview (for fear of someone expecting me to work with Make). But so far, life has been too short for me to waste my time on Gnu Autoconf. And I don't feel guilty about this, or like someone who doesn't know fundamentals. Autoconf is by all accounts a horrible system. Gnu Make ain't much better. So I can't fault people for trying to avoid this mess.
- dmix 5y ago
  All software is fundamentally helping deal with abstractions as this.
  - eru 5y ago
    Build systems in general can be ok, or even elegant and fun. Autoconf is just really terrible.
    - arp242 5y ago
      Autoconf is one of those programs that solved real problems when it was created, in a way that was actually fairly reasonable at the time too. There's a reason it became so popular. But it's now 30 years later, and what was reasonable then is a liability now. Sendmail is another great example of this phenomenon.
      - eru 5y ago

pjmlp 5y ago

We did exactly that last year.