7 ms·
> Start publishing images to GitHub And when GitHub starts similar shenanigans, move out to where? I am old enough to know the we can't trust BigTech and their
by FlyingSnake 4y ago
> Start publishing images to GitHub
And when GitHub starts similar shenanigans, move out to where? I am old enough to know the we can't trust BigTech and their unpredictable behaviors.
Eventually we need to start a Codeberg like alternative using Prototype funds to be self reliant.
1: https://codeberg.org/ https://codeberg.org/
2: https://prototypefund.de/ https://prototypefund.de/
- davedx 4y agoIt actually sounds reasonable to me? They have an open source program, the article says its open source definition is "too strict" because it says you must have "no pathway to commercialization". I mean why should you expect someone to host gigabytes of docker images for you, for free?
- JonChesterfield 4y agoWell, it's how they established themselves in the market. Without being friendly to open source projects they wouldn't have had that marketing and wouldn't exist as a company. So now they destroy their foundations and learn whether they 10x or fold. Pretty standard VC playbook so I assume that's the driving force here.
- lmm 4y agoIf you're going to call it "open source" that should mean what "open source" usually means, i.e. that e.g. RedHat is eligible.
- rollcat 4y ago> the article says its open source definition is "too strict" because it says you must have "no pathway to commercialization" What a load of crap. Free Software's "0th freedom" is the ability to use the program for whatever purpose you wish. The definition of Open Source is even looser than that. They are asking their "Open Source" users to make their software non-free, by restricting its use cases. Anyway, the writing has been on the wall for a long while. If you haven't moved off Docker Hub yet, now is the time.
- 9dev 4y agoNo, they are refusing to provide free artefact hosting to startups.
- tommoor 4y agoWhile I have no _expectations_ of free hosting, one example of a project that will be affected is mine – https://hub.docker.com/repository/docker/outlinewiki/outline https://hub.docker.com/repository/docker/outlinewiki/outline I have been building this for 5+ years, and offer a community edition for free while the hosted version is paid. Once the community edition starts costing money there will be even less reason to continue supporting it, it already causes a lot of extra work and problems that I'm otherwise uncompensated for.
- grumple 4y ago> Once the community edition starts costing money there will be even less reason to continue supporting it This is exactly the reasoning Docker is using, so it seems reasonable?
- gwd 4y agoGitlab's Open Source program has similar restrictions, and it's just kind of weird. Like, there are multiple companies actually making money off of Xen; but because Xen is owned by a non-profit foundation (with a six-digit yearly budget), and the foundation isn't trying to profit, it still qualifies. (As does, for instance, the GNOME project.) OTOH, somewhere else in this context it was mentioned that curl is almost entirely maintained by one guy who makes money from consulting; and because of that, he wouldn't qualify. So if you're either small enough to be a side hobby project, or large enough to have your own non-profit, you can get it for free; anywhere in between and you have to pay. Personally I'd be happy for Xen to pay for Gitlab Ultimate, except that the price model doesn't really match an open-source project: we can't tell exactly how many people are going to show up and contribute, so how can we pay per-user?
- BlueTemplar 4y agoSomewhat related : what is Docker's stance on the licenses that fail the first Open Souce test, those that forbid commercial use (NC) ?
- JonChesterfield 4y agoWe need to use a distributed system instead of a centralised one. Probably built on a source control system that can handle that.
- RobotToaster 4y agoThis seems like a perfect use case for IPFS.
- r3trohack3r 4y agoWe had a prototype Docker/BuildKit registry using IPFS at Netflix built by Edgar. https://github.com/hinshun/ipcs https://github.com/hinshun/ipcs
- mac-chaffee 4y agoMay want to keep your eye on dragonfly, a P2P image distribution protocol: https://d7y.io/docs/ https://d7y.io/docs/
- gooob 4y agoa collection of distributed systems. start your own. connect with other enthusiasts in your area to get them connected.
- dijit 4y agoWhat happened to the old mirror lists? The ones where apt/rpm package repositories tend to be hosted?
- aembleton 4y agohttps://www.debian.org/mirror/list https://www.debian.org/mirror/list
- dijit 4y agoI mean, why can't (or don't) we use those for things like docker images, npm registries and the like. All this centralised dependence talk is frustrating (it's expensive, no free lunch etc;) when it's largely been a solved problem for decades.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- delfinom 4y agoYea, people are really spoiled due to more than a decade of VC and general investing cashburn offering tons of services for free. But at the end of the day there are costs and companies will want to recoup their money. The problem with just replacing GitHub isn't the source code hosting part. There's tons of alternatives both commercial and open source. The problem is the cost of CI infrastructure and CDN/content/release hosting. Even moderating said CI infrastructure is a nightmare. freedesktop.org which uses a self-hosted gitlab instance recently had to shutdown CI for everything but official projects because the crypto mining bots attacked over the last few days hard and fast.
- JeremyNT 4y agoIt actually seems pretty reasonable to let BigTech host stuff, so long as you know the rug pull is going to come. Let the VCs light money on fire hosting the stuff we use for free, then once they stop throwing money at it figure out a plan B. Of course you should have a sketch of your plan B ready from the start so you are prepared. If you view all of this "free" VC subsidized stuff as temporary/ephemeral you can still have a healthy relationship with it.
- 5e92cb50239222b 4y agoThis is how I've been living for many years and it has saved me many thousands of dollars, which is a significant amount of money here. The various "cloud" free tiers cost them at least $600 for the past year alone. Same for free CI offerings, etc. Thank you VCs and BigCo for not cutting out regions that are probably net negative for you overall (I guess it may be serious money for me, but doesn't even register on the radar at their scale).
- user3939382 4y agoIt should use DHT/BitTorrent. Organizations could share magnet links to the official images. OS projects have been doing it for years with ISOs.
- screamingninja 4y agoBitTorrent will solve the distribution problem but not magically provide more storage. Someone still has to foot the bill for storing gigabytes (or terabytes) worth of docker images.
- aembleton 4y agoHave a free client that seeds any images that you download, and a paid for one that doesn't. Now you have all those who don't want to pay providing your storage and bandwidth.
- r3trohack3r 4y agoThis is an excellent use of p2p incentives. Share to pay. Tricky bit is, for some users, you’ll either abandon them with no way to share or you will still be paying their ingress/egress fees when their client falls back to your TURN server if NAT hole punching fails. You’ll also have to solve image expiration gracefully. Hosting a “publish as much as you want” append-only ledger isn’t going to scale infinitely. There needs to be garbage collection, rate limiting, fair-use policies, moderation, etc. Otherwise you’re still going to outstrip your storage pool.
- MayeulC 4y agoIt should probably work like ipfs, with pinning services. You can pin (provide a server that stores and shares the contents) yourself, or pay for a commercial pinning service (or get one from an OSS-friendly org, etc).
- chaxor 4y agoThis doesn't make sense as an argument at all. If there isn't anyone using the image, no one will have it on their computer... Sure - but that isn't as much of an issue if you have a build file that constructs the image up from more basic parts. Secondly, the popular files get way way faster with the more their used/downloaded. Torrent is a phenomenal *wonderful* system to distribute Machine Learning weights, docker images, and databases. It's a developers dream for a basic utility of distributing data. Potentially ipfs could be useful too, but idk much about it specifically. One of the most revolutionary and fundamental tools to be made is a basic way / template / paradigm which constructs databases in a replicable way, such that the hash of the code is mapped to the hash of the data. Then the user could either just download the data or reproduce it locally, depending on their system's capabilities, and automatically become a host for that data in the network.
- nindalf 4y ago> And when GitHub starts similar shenanigans The difference between GitHub and Docker is that GitHub is profitable.
- whydoyoucare 4y agoProfitable today. Moving from docker to github is just kicking the can down the road.
- vhanda 4y agoGenuine question: Is Github profitable? I can't seem to figure out if it was before or after the acquisition from Microsoft.
- pksebben 4y agowhether or not it's generating cash at the moment is probably a secondary concern for Microsoft, behind having the code to train on.
- FlyingSnake 4y agoSo is Docker Inc. The last I heard it is profitable and is doing quite well
- r3trohack3r 4y agoThe economics of hosting an image registry are tough. Just mirroring the npm registry can cost $100s per month in storage for tiny little tarballs. Hosting GB images in an append-only registry, some of which get published weekly or even daily, will burn an incredible amount of money in storage costs. And that’s before talking about ingress and egress. There will also be a tonne of engineering costs for managing it, especially if you want to explore compression to push down storage costs. A lot of image layers share a lot of files, if you can store the decompressed tarballs in a chunk store with clever chunking you can probably reduce storage costs by an order of magnitude. But, at the end of the day, expect costs for this to shoot into the 6-7 digit USD range per month in storage and bandwidth as a lower bound for your community hosted image registry.
- ijaeifjzdi 4y agoyou just have to host the recipe and the hash/meta-data c'mon. This is not amateur hour. Hosting the whole thing only made sense for docker because their plan was always to do this microsoft style play. If you assume you are either open source or fully closed enterprises, the problem is very, very easy to solve. and cheap. Just relinquish full control of being able to close all the doors for a fee, like they are doing now.
- r3trohack3r 4y agoRerunning a glorified series of bash scripts on every install doesn’t work at any sort of scale. This is why we’ve moved away from configuration over ssh to either: 1) deterministic builds with centralized caches 2) snapshots Docker has some features of (1) but is really (2). You absolutely do not want to download the recipe to build a Docker image instead of the image itself. Further, the base images have no recipe. They are a tarball of a slimmed down pristine base os install.
- yrro 4y agoThe funny thing is that I don't think anyone has ever had to pay a Linux distribution for hosting packages of their open source software... :thinking face:
- maxloh 4y agoI don't think we will receive enough donations to cover infrastructure costs, let alone maintainers' salaries. Even core-js sole maintainer failed to raise enough donations to feed his own family, despite the library is used by at least half of the top 1000 Alexa websites. [0] People (and also big-techs) just won't pay for anything they can get for free. [0]: https://github.com/zloirock/core-js/blob/master/docs/2023-02-14-so-whats-next.md https://github.com/zloirock/core-js/blob/master/docs/2023-02...
- BlueTemplar 4y agoI guess the SQLite team managed to do it by using an even more permissive license than GPL, which attracted big companies into funding them ??
- robotburrito 4y agoMaybe we all start hosting this stuff via torrent or something?
- syklep 4y agoCodeburg is more strict for blocking projects at the moment. Wikiless is blocked by Codeburg for using the Wikipedia puzzle logo but is still up and unchanged on GitHub.
- quickthrower2 4y agoHosting images can be doe via hypertext transfer protocol alone. Keep a local copy of your dependencies and back that up. Done.