3 ms·
> The fact that you need a special distribution like minikube, Kind, k3s, microk8s, or k0s to run on a single-node instance. (The fact that I named five such di
by threeseed 4y ago
> The fact that you need a special distribution like minikube, Kind, k3s, microk8s, or k0s to run on a single-node instance. (The fact that I named five such distributions is a canary of its own.)
They serve completely different purposes though.
Some are Docker-based designed to be lightweight for testing e.g Kind, others are designed to be scalable to full clusters e.g k3s.
And I think having the choice is a good thing as it proves that Kubernetes is vendor-agnostic.
- ClumsyPilot 4y ago> The fact that I named five such distributions is a canary of its own. Seriously? Linux still can't even agree on tooling to display UI to the user, and its been like 30 years. Or how many package managers and their supposed replacements are there?
- moondev 4y agoIt's also not even accurate. You can absolutely run a single node cluster with kubeadm - aka upstream Kubernetes
- spoiler 4y ago> The fact that I named five such distributions is a canary of its own That can be said for programming language implementations. Or programming languages as a concept, too. Or configuration formats. Or even arbitrary products or libraries that overlap and handle the same domain. Another comment mentioned Linux distributions. My points is: what is your point? The whole industry is like this (for better or worse). Picking something you don't like and slapping "it has more than one implementation" is hardly an argumentative against it (or any of the other implementations).