4 ms·

Some Kubernetes and Docker people get somewhat religious about it, and rather than taking “I/we don't support that and don't have any immediate plans to, but fe

Some Kubernetes and Docker people get somewhat religious about it, and rather than taking “I/we don't support that and don't have any immediate plans to, but feel free to try it yourself” as a valid response will plead, nag, and otherwise try to cajole a project's maintainer's to reconsider, sometimes being irritatingly persistent and calling into question a person's overall intelligence because they don't currently want to directly support that plumbing. Such discussions can become time-consuming, tiresome, and (if really persistent in trying to convert them to the cause) difficult to just ignore. > be banned if I asked about it I assume this means the maintainer(s) have experienced the above a few times, and have given up trying to be more polite about it! Don't take it personally. If you want to use a tool with that plumbing then feel free to DIY. If you make it work well, perhaps publish your process and/or images and support it for others who need/want that support.

sph 4y ago
Bah, what a dumb argument. There's a whole ocean between "we don't really support Docker, you're on your own" and "if you dare ask this again, you'll get banned." That's not the Kubernetes guys being religious here. Also, it doesn't even make sense on the engineering point of view. I understand not liking Docker the company or Kubernetes the product, but Linux namespaces are a kernel level facility, and banning people because they dare ask how to integrate this product with a native subsystem seems absolute zealotry from people with oversized ego. Nothing wrong with that, but let's call a spade a spade. It's their project, so it's their right to be a prick about it, but that shouldn't stop other people to call them out on it.
- dspillett 4y ago
  > There's a whole ocean between "we don't really support Docker" and "if you dare ask this again, you'll get banned." There is. And I'm suggesting that the water filling that ocean has come from having the same discussion over and over again with people who have asked in the past, each thinking they might be the one to finally help you see the light. I've not personally dealt with it from the point of view of infrastructure choices, but I hear tale of those who have, and I've been subject to it with regard to people who didn't agree with a licence choice so can speak for how much it makes you not want to engage at all just-in-case. I'm not suggesting you'd be like that, but I understand not wanting to engage on the matter based on previous experiences.
  - d3nj4l 4y ago
    Perhaps there is a difference between "not wanting to engage on the matter" and "banning someone on sight"? Maybe there's polite ways to say, "Sorry, but we're not interested in supporting docker, and we don't care about any arguments for it" that would take less effort than rudely telling someone to fuck off?
    - dspillett 4y ago
      Of course the suggestion of “banning on sight” could have been an attempt at humour by way of hyperbole, something I should have noted in my previous reply. > that would take less effort than Unfortunately, not always. Sometimes the only way to convince people that it isn't worth their time continuing to try to change your mind, is to blatantly be a dick about it. I try not to jump straight to dickishness though: I'll state my position politely once, I may have time to repeat that once or twice more, then out come the big guns. On a public mailing list or similar I might be more blunt: linking to past discussions in the first instance then jumping to DickCon1. On a public group the discussion is taking more than just my time and might encourage others to chime in and drag the matter instead of letting it close. And again: the suggestion of “banning on sight” could have been intended as an attempt at humour by way of hyperbole, rather than the direct “off you fuck” that was felt. Communication of sentiment online is very prone to errors like that.
      - d3nj4l 4y ago
        > Communication of sentiment online is very prone to errors like that This is exactly my point: given that online communication is low bandwidth, why are you attempting humour with someone new, who is therefore very unlikely to get it? (And, given Drew's track record, I find it extremely unlikely that he is just trying to be funny, but that's a different matter.) Also, your point about not wanting to spend more time on a discussion than is necessary, you can simply... not. Say not interested, post a link to a FAQ that covers your stance, and simply don't engage. You don't need to be offensive. You don't need to be worried about people dragging the matter. It's just a discussion.
      - 4y ago
kodah 4y ago
> Some Kubernetes and Docker people get somewhat religious about it I asked once and didn't get a response for what I think was 3-5 days and asked again (it is a low frequency channel, but that gap seemed appropriate). I wasn't making a religious argument, literally just asking about the availability of images. > Don't take it personally. If you want to use a tool with that plumbing then feel free to DIY. If you make it work well, perhaps publish your process and/or images and support it for others who need/want that support. I mean Drew was pretty clear that I couldn't even ask questions related to either subject in that channel. I don't take it personally, but it certainly affected the way that I view the project and Drew as a human being.

sph 4y ago

Bah, what a dumb argument. There's a whole ocean between "we don't really support Docker, you're on your own" and "if you dare ask this again, you'll get banned." That's not the Kubernetes guys being religious here. Also, it doesn't even make sense on the engineering point of view. I understand not liking Docker the company or Kubernetes the product, but Linux namespaces are a kernel level facility, and banning people because they dare ask how to integrate this product with a native subsystem seems absolute zealotry from people with oversized ego. Nothing wrong with that, but let's call a spade a spade. It's their project, so it's their right to be a prick about it, but that shouldn't stop other people to call them out on it.

dspillett 4y ago
> There's a whole ocean between "we don't really support Docker" and "if you dare ask this again, you'll get banned." There is. And I'm suggesting that the water filling that ocean has come from having the same discussion over and over again with people who have asked in the past, each thinking they might be the one to finally help you see the light. I've not personally dealt with it from the point of view of infrastructure choices, but I hear tale of those who have, and I've been subject to it with regard to people who didn't agree with a licence choice so can speak for how much it makes you not want to engage at all just-in-case. I'm not suggesting you'd be like that, but I understand not wanting to engage on the matter based on previous experiences.
- d3nj4l 4y ago
  Perhaps there is a difference between "not wanting to engage on the matter" and "banning someone on sight"? Maybe there's polite ways to say, "Sorry, but we're not interested in supporting docker, and we don't care about any arguments for it" that would take less effort than rudely telling someone to fuck off?
  - dspillett 4y ago
    Of course the suggestion of “banning on sight” could have been an attempt at humour by way of hyperbole, something I should have noted in my previous reply. > that would take less effort than Unfortunately, not always. Sometimes the only way to convince people that it isn't worth their time continuing to try to change your mind, is to blatantly be a dick about it. I try not to jump straight to dickishness though: I'll state my position politely once, I may have time to repeat that once or twice more, then out come the big guns. On a public mailing list or similar I might be more blunt: linking to past discussions in the first instance then jumping to DickCon1. On a public group the discussion is taking more than just my time and might encourage others to chime in and drag the matter instead of letting it close. And again: the suggestion of “banning on sight” could have been intended as an attempt at humour by way of hyperbole, rather than the direct “off you fuck” that was felt. Communication of sentiment online is very prone to errors like that.
    - d3nj4l 4y ago
      > Communication of sentiment online is very prone to errors like that This is exactly my point: given that online communication is low bandwidth, why are you attempting humour with someone new, who is therefore very unlikely to get it? (And, given Drew's track record, I find it extremely unlikely that he is just trying to be funny, but that's a different matter.) Also, your point about not wanting to spend more time on a discussion than is necessary, you can simply... not. Say not interested, post a link to a FAQ that covers your stance, and simply don't engage. You don't need to be offensive. You don't need to be worried about people dragging the matter. It's just a discussion.
    - 4y ago

kodah 4y ago

> Some Kubernetes and Docker people get somewhat religious about it I asked once and didn't get a response for what I think was 3-5 days and asked again (it is a low frequency channel, but that gap seemed appropriate). I wasn't making a religious argument, literally just asking about the availability of images. > Don't take it personally. If you want to use a tool with that plumbing then feel free to DIY. If you make it work well, perhaps publish your process and/or images and support it for others who need/want that support. I mean Drew was pretty clear that I couldn't even ask questions related to either subject in that channel. I don't take it personally, but it certainly affected the way that I view the project and Drew as a human being.