3 ms·

> The author is absolutely right here: I disagree. At most the author complains about packaging, and singles out a specific Linux distro as being very popular

by rualca 5y ago

> The author is absolutely right here: I disagree. At most the author complains about packaging, and singles out a specific Linux distro as being very popular as a base image for Docker containers. For some reason the same author ignores the fact that Alpine-based images are highly favoured as base images because they allow the same software to be packaged and distributed without requiring hundreds of MB of bloat. Also, it's irrelevant which base image was used to package an application. All that it matters is whether running '$ docker run <image>' is enough to run the app. The answer to that question is an unequivocally "yes" regardless which Linux distro you're using, and that's the exact opposite of Linux being dead. In fact, Linux is the OS of choice for deploying software, and that isn't really compatible with the notion of being dead.

megous 5y ago
Docker ecosystem itself is just pure bloat. I already have all the tools to build and use thirdparty software in my host distro. Why should I need another [untrusted] copy.
- rualca 5y ago
  > Docker ecosystem itself is just pure bloat. I already have all the tools to build and use thirdparty software in my host distro. Why should I need another [untrusted] copy. I don't find this argument is reasonable at all. Just because someone uploaded their half-baked package into a registry that does not mean you are expected to not package and maintain your own application. In fact, it's crazy to rely your production system on whatever package any random person made available to the world.
  - bshipp 5y ago
    Dockerfiles are easy to edit and validate. Building is just as easy. A container registry saves some time in terms of spinning up a new instance but if you've got a vital service running in a container it makes sense to take the time to validate any updates and test any changes before replacing the old one.
  - megous 5y ago
    How is Docker exempt from this, though? More likely, you're exposing yourself to more random people, when using docker, because you may now be using Ubuntu on top of Arch Linux host, or whatever.

by rualca 5y ago

megous 5y ago

Docker ecosystem itself is just pure bloat. I already have all the tools to build and use thirdparty software in my host distro. Why should I need another [untrusted] copy.

rualca 5y ago
> Docker ecosystem itself is just pure bloat. I already have all the tools to build and use thirdparty software in my host distro. Why should I need another [untrusted] copy. I don't find this argument is reasonable at all. Just because someone uploaded their half-baked package into a registry that does not mean you are expected to not package and maintain your own application. In fact, it's crazy to rely your production system on whatever package any random person made available to the world.
- bshipp 5y ago
  Dockerfiles are easy to edit and validate. Building is just as easy. A container registry saves some time in terms of spinning up a new instance but if you've got a vital service running in a container it makes sense to take the time to validate any updates and test any changes before replacing the old one.
- megous 5y ago
  How is Docker exempt from this, though? More likely, you're exposing yourself to more random people, when using docker, because you may now be using Ubuntu on top of Arch Linux host, or whatever.