2 ms·
Article itself and the idea in general seems controversial at best for me. I could not find answer for myself why Docker is any close to be dead and why Podman
by CoolCold 4y ago
Article itself and the idea in general seems controversial at best for me.
I could not find answer for myself why Docker is any close to be dead and why Podman is the thing I should use instead of Docker immediately.
Q 1. Docker has some policy change and your company may need to pay for it - if you have > 250 persons/10 million revenue
A 1: Indi/Solo devs out of scope. Enterprises probably fine with that anyways.
Q 2. Docker has limits for pulls from Docker hub!!!! You have 100 (200 with login) downloads/single IP for 6 hours interval.
A 2: It was already mentioned, switching to Podman, while using Dockerhub doesn't magically helps. Moreover, practically I find it totally fine for Indi/Solo dev. For companies, who's amount of pulls can be higher - you want and have in place your local registry anyways to ensure Business Continuity and this doesn't bother you much.
Q 3. Running no background processes, running rootless is good because of ...
A 3: On dev env (your local laptop, for example) you do not care much - your goal is ease of use. On production, running rootless rises question from me:
* how you expect firewall (iptables) to be updated for port forwardings?
* how you expect networks and bridges organized without root?
* how you expect auto restart for container to happen on failure without supervising it?
* some security advises and mitigation guides mention disabling user namespaces and was/is disabled by default in some distros https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28054823 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28054823 - your security & system administration team may have such limits in place on production
* those who care for intruder gets into container and can hijack system further use FireCracker or similar approach anyways [for production]
So what is left in "pros" for Podman, have I missed anything?