10 ms·

Previous communication: > If you don't upgrade to a paid subscription, Docker will retain your organization data for 30 days, after which it will be subject to

Previous communication: > If you don't upgrade to a paid subscription, Docker will retain your organization data for 30 days, after which it will be subject to deletion. During that period you will maintain access to any of your public images. New communication: > We’d also like to clarify that public images will only be removed from Docker Hub if their maintainer decides to delete them. We’re sorry that our initial communications failed to make this clear. Given these statements directly contradict each other I am a bit surprised this is called clarification. It feels like they changed the actual strategy, not just the communication around it.

sleepytimetea 4y ago
Exactly ! I remember the original email mentioned deletion and now they say "we never said that". Time to get rid of Docker in our world.
- mekster 4y ago
  With what?
  - notbuyingit 4y ago
    If you want actual reproducable, actual portable software, Nix. Otherwise there are countless other OCI runtimes, cri-o, containers, etc. Kubernetes doesn't even use Docker. What a thing, docker. I can't get over the staying power it has had despite... Everything.
    - mekster 4y ago
      How do I run the ecosystem the docker already has with nix alone? It's not just the runtime.
      - deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]
      - gcoakes 4y ago
        I'm not certain what "ecosystem" means in this context, but you can build docker images using Nix. It's actually pretty cool because the image only contains the runtime dependencies of whatever you throw in the container. No package manager or build system is included. I've only tinkered with Nix, nothing in my professional life, so YMMV.
      - ParetoOptimal 4y ago
        I'm super interested in the ecosystem you mean here. I'm assuming that you mean ecosystem around images like kubernetes, ECS, etc like the other commenter guessed? If so, I think Nix being able to create docker images addresses that specific concern.
        cuu508 4y ago
        Can nix run images created with docker?
        ParetoOptimal 4y ago
        Yes. See https://nix.dev/tutorials/building-and-running-docker-images https://nix.dev/tutorials/building-and-running-docker-images Or do you mean run as in "use docker image(s) within a nix expression". Like if you have a webapp with a nix devshell but want to start the docker postgres container for development? You can do that too, yes.
        mekster 4y ago
        I can easily install many apps hosted at the Docker hub but how would I achieve that without Docker hub, unless everyone starts hosting things elsewhere but that'll take a good while assuming the community's consensus is to ditch Docker altogether.
        ParetoOptimal 4y ago
        > I can easily install many apps hosted at the Docker hub but how would I achieve that without Docker hub, I'm sorry, I don't understand what you mean.
  - mort96 4y ago
    Podman is pretty good, and more or less a drop-in replacement.
    - hashtag-til 4y ago
      Yep, already wrote an internal guide for my whole team to move away from docker into podman+quay.io by the end of next week. Works like a charm on our macbooks, very neat. Even if we need to pay, I’m looking for alternatives not Docker Inc. - There is only so much you can take. I don’t want to rely on them anymore.
      - halostatue 4y ago
        Any chance of seeing a version of that guide outside of your organization?
  - gpm 4y ago
    Someone on lobste.rs mentioned quay.io (maintained by redhat) as an alternative to dockerhub. Anyone have any experience with it?
    - sofixa 4y ago
      It started as a CoreOS project and for a long time it was the only ebterprisey registry, and it included security scanning. Had some availability issues some time ago, but AFAIK today it's pretty good.
      - bravetraveler 4y ago
        The software is nice, if looking to run your own - I'd recommend it over the typical Docker-provided incantation Way more enterprise appropriate, for example - granular control on caches
    - bigiain 4y ago
      Given the CentOS shit, I'm not convinced jumping from Docker Inc to RedHat is appropriately mitigating the risk of a corporate rug pull once they've decided its time for the next step in their enshittification plan...
- sitzkrieg 4y ago
  im looking forward to hipster posts about compiling and running your stack directly on a machine. probably one, and it'll be faster. that'll be great
  - Kwpolska 4y ago
    Nah, Docker/containers are here to stay. But Docker, Inc. isn’t.
  - bigiain 4y ago
    No no no, you build your stack, transpile it to WASM, and run it on your user's phones! WebRTC to run a distributed shared database across every phone that's not behind NAT! No servers. No databases. No electricity bills. Your backend hardware fleet automatically updates itself every couple of years _and pays_ for it itself!
  - julianlam 4y ago
    Wait, that's hipster now? Isn't that a graybeard thing?
- themitigating 4y ago
  If you run a company wouldn't it be cheaper to just pay. This can't be worth the trouble changing everything
  - bigiain 4y ago
    Sure. This is just a big "fuck you" to non company supported open source projects, as it turns out even ones labelled "sponsored css" on Docker Inc's own website. Which are all clearly insignificant and unimportant, dumb little command line utilities and libraries like, say, curl... https://github.com/docker/hub-feedback/issues/2314#issuecomment-1471905927 https://github.com/docker/hub-feedback/issues/2314#issuecomm...
    - julianlam 4y ago
      Hi, ah... perhaps I'm an idiot for asking, but why does a near-ubiquitous system utility like curl need to be installed via a container? Is it not available on something like Alpine... and if so, then maybe it should be? It's like saying I have to install `vi` via Docker... please don't tell me vim has a Docker hub repo too...
- hgsgm 4y ago
  Please share a copy of that email.
  - Symbiote 4y ago
    Docker is sunsetting Free Team organizations Free Team organizations are a legacy subscription tier that no longer exists. This tier included many of the same features, rates, and functionality as a paid Docker Team subscription. After reviewing the list of accounts that are members of legacy Free Team organizations, we’ve identified yours as potentially being one of them. If you own a legacy Free Team organization, access to paid features — including private repositories — will be suspended on April 14, 2023 (11:59 pm UTC). Upgrade your subscription before April 14, 2023 to continue accessing your organization. If you don’t upgrade to a paid subscription, Docker will retain your organization data for 30 days, after which it will be subject to deletion. During that time, you will maintain access to any images in your public repositories, though rate limitations will apply. At any point during the 30-day period, you can restore access to your organization account if you upgrade to a paid subscription. Visit our FAQ [1] for more information. [1] https://web.docker.com/rs/790-SSB-375/images/privatereposfaq.pdf https://web.docker.com/rs/790-SSB-375/images/privatereposfaq...
    - saurik 4y ago
      This is the exact quote that was already up-thread of here, and they absolutely are not claiming they "never said that"; instead, they are clarifying that "organization data" does not include "public images", and while that's confusing, I can appreciate why they didn't think it would be and--lo and behold--they are publicly apologizing for being so confusing and taking the hit for having done so.
      - deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]
      - bigiain 4y ago
        Its the very next sentence after that one that they are claiming has been practically universally "misunderstood". "If you don’t upgrade to a paid subscription, Docker will retain your organization data for 30 days, after which it will be subject to deletion. During that time, you will maintain access to any images in your public repositories, though rate limitations will apply." The cynical devil on my left shoulder is telling me "Some smartass in an emergency meeting noted the ambiguity in that second sentence, and suggested lets just claim that 'During that time you will maintain access to any images' did not actually mean it's obvious implication that 'after that time you will no linger have access to any images' and this is all just a big misunderstanding" - and that how we ended up with this new "clarification". The even more cynical devil on my right shoulder is telling me some actively evil asshole intentionally wrote that ambiguous sentence to give themselves a 'get out of jail card' in case complaints went viral...
gilrain 4y ago
[flagged]
- LASR 4y ago
  Organizational gaslighting? I personally hate the term “gaslighting”, but it could be apt here.
- dang 4y ago
  Maybe so, but please don't post unsubstantive comments to Hacker News.
  - actually_a_dog 4y ago
    I’d say that’s a very substantive comment. The fact that you don’t want to hear it does not affect the substance. Of course, I realize I’m saying this on a site that literally makes unpopular comments harder to read lol, and where I’m only allowed to post ~5 comments at a time, meanwhile nobody will tell me why.
    - dang 4y ago
      > nobody will tell me why https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29042583 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29042583 Edit: I just took a look at your recent comments and they seem mostly fine—and some are very good (thank you!), so I've removed the rate limit from your account. I'm taking a bit of a risk in doing that but if you'd meet us halfway in good faith, that should be more than enough to solve the problem.
eternalban 4y ago
That depends on what "organization data" means. Does that phrasing cover the images or just the existence of the organization in Docker (i.e. deleted organization)?
- gpm 4y ago
  > During that period you will maintain access to any of your public images. Pretty unambiguously means "after that period you may not have access to any of your public images".
  - eternalban 4y ago
    Isn't that like a service like Github saying 'you will maintain access to any of your public projects' as in administrative access to one's own projects. After that period, you are no longer the owner of that repo and you no longer have "access". So I can still clone your github project but alas you no longer can commit to it. https://docs.docker.com/docker-hub/orgs/ https://docs.docker.com/docker-hub/orgs/ https://hub.docker.com/orgs https://hub.docker.com/orgs
    - wholinator2 4y ago
      Doesn't sound like it to me. If they meant "administrative access" they should have said "administrative access". They didn't, they just said "access" which unambiguously means just "access". Would've been very easy for them to make a one word correction somewhere in the dozen or so people who should have read this before it went out. But they didn't, they just said "access". If they wanted unambiguous meaning, they could have easily just said what they meant. Methinks that's exactly what they did
      - eternalban 4y ago
        Well, methinks otherwise. Lack of access does not mean files deleted. Organization data deleted means account deleted. Contention here was the claim that they have done a uturn but they never said they will delete images. This entire somewhat useless thread is about whether lack of access actually meant images deleted. (Administrative is a word that I used in my comment and a red herring to pick on, quite frankly.)
mikesir87 4y ago
(from Docker DevRel team) > Given these statements directly contradict each other Actually... they aren't contradictory. The organization data will be retained for 30 days and is subject to deletion. That data includes the teams, memberships, etc. But, it wasn't clear what we were going to do about the images. Keeping the public images is important as many other images build on top of them. > It feels like they changed the actual strategy We recognize it might feel that way, so apologies. But, that's part of where we are recognize it wasn't clear the technical details... we didn't talk at all about the images. After the feedback, we recognized this, so wanted to make that clear.
- bragr 4y ago
  >Actually... they aren't contradictory. They are. Your intent may not have been contradictory, but the messages received by everyone else were contradictory. You should own that if you are serious about doing better. Your intent doesn't really matter in these situations.
  - travisjungroth 4y ago
    Yeah, really weird that after an apology announcement they’re still defending the original message at all. Not too hard to say “Yes, those messages contradict each other. The first one did not communicate our actual plan. The second message is a correction and clarification.”
  - chasil 4y ago
    It is important to understand that most corporations do not apologize, ever, unless there is a direct threat to cash flow. This behavior is now demonstrated, it is the desired relationship, and it will be the baseline, all protestations aside. The apology is meaningless. If this is not what you want, then take steps to limit the damage done to you, and do it now.
  - xboxnolifes 4y ago
    That's.... why they are saying it was poor communication.
incangold 4y ago
Reminds me of the gaslighting of the D&D community recently around changes to the license there. It’s like watching a five year old who’s convinced he can fool his parents.
- pizzaknife 4y ago
  sorry what d&d license change?
  - ekidd 4y ago
    WotC tried to retroactively revoke an open gaming license that had been in widespread use since 2002. They had a legal theory why they could do this, but that theory contradicted quite a few public statements they had made on record. IP lawyers had very mixed opinions. Many TT-RPG players enjoy reading rules carefully and figuring out fun ways to "exploit" them. So everyone jumped on WotC's changes and dissected the implications. And many companies in the larger ecosystem quickly announced plans to ship their own games competing with D&D. WotC decided to back down and to just use Creative Commons, which largely resolved the immediate issue.
djha-skin 4y ago
rolls eyes OR, their marketing and DevRel departments and their engineering departments simply had a miscommunication; when it was realized, the present post was composed. This kind of thing happens inside companies all the time, including the one you're probably working at right now. No need to get up in arms over it.
- hgsgm 4y ago
  People who are busy working aren't going to rush to HN to post about how they understood the announcement and are reacting as needed. People who are bored (like me) will post rants and accusations.
- worksonmine 4y ago
  I don't believe it was a miscommunication. Even if it was a company as important as Docker inc, mentioning DELETING containers requires some care and should raise some flags at any serious communications department. This is not just the wrong date for a convention in the newsletter. What impact does it have on the ecosystem they've built? Some really serious projects use Docker and even if they have their own repositories can they be sure the software they rely on can keep publishing containers? Even at the tiny startups I've worked on I'm asked to proofread any technical stuff they want to publish, I assume Docker does too.
  - bombcar 4y ago
    This is why I believe that they changed what would happen after the pushback and are trying to hide that they changed. In reality they were probably just going to disable access to updating all along and then maybe someday delete things, but didn’t want to say exactly that.
    - julianlam 4y ago
      The thing is, if images are still accessible, then they still incur egress costs for Docker, thus negating the potential cost savings from this move. So at best, they just tanked their reputation for... minimal cost savings?
mmcnl 4y ago
You are right, it's two different messages. I always am annoyed by how companies apologize for the communication or the confusion arising after the communication. As if we, the public, didn't understand properly or are too dumb to understand what they tried to say. We understood perfectly and the _message_ was dumb, not the communication around the message. It doesn't feel like an honest apology.
- saurik 4y ago
  Dude: "the message" is "the communication".
  - bigiain 4y ago
    "No no no, the message in our contradictory communication is actually the message that you can interpret that contradiction with if you have this new piece of previously undisclosed information! How could you possibly have been confused by that? We are DevRel, we are communication professionals..."
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
tyingq 4y ago
Both sound like "you won't be able to update them", so images sort of permanently squatted and growing tech debt, potentially vulnerabilities, etc. They should really allow for configuring the ":latest" tag to raise a 404 or something if this is what all that means.
- pmoriarty 4y ago
  By replying on a tag for your security you're opening yourself up to vulnerabilities.
  - tyingq 4y ago
    Relying? I was assuming a 404 for "latest" might cause people to look into what happened with the image and find it's new home. Without locking them out of specific versions if they needed them for some reason.
fulafel 4y ago
My first reaction to the news was "ok, net positive, unmaintained images will get cleaned up and break builds, and fewer people will then be bit by vulnerabilities in unknowingly used abanoned layers". But I guess not?

sleepytimetea 4y ago

Exactly ! I remember the original email mentioned deletion and now they say "we never said that". Time to get rid of Docker in our world.

mekster 4y ago
With what?
- notbuyingit 4y ago
  If you want actual reproducable, actual portable software, Nix. Otherwise there are countless other OCI runtimes, cri-o, containers, etc. Kubernetes doesn't even use Docker. What a thing, docker. I can't get over the staying power it has had despite... Everything.
  - mekster 4y ago
    How do I run the ecosystem the docker already has with nix alone? It's not just the runtime.
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
    - gcoakes 4y ago
      I'm not certain what "ecosystem" means in this context, but you can build docker images using Nix. It's actually pretty cool because the image only contains the runtime dependencies of whatever you throw in the container. No package manager or build system is included. I've only tinkered with Nix, nothing in my professional life, so YMMV.
    - ParetoOptimal 4y ago
      I'm super interested in the ecosystem you mean here. I'm assuming that you mean ecosystem around images like kubernetes, ECS, etc like the other commenter guessed? If so, I think Nix being able to create docker images addresses that specific concern.
      - cuu508 4y ago
        Can nix run images created with docker?
        ParetoOptimal 4y ago
        Yes. See https://nix.dev/tutorials/building-and-running-docker-images https://nix.dev/tutorials/building-and-running-docker-images Or do you mean run as in "use docker image(s) within a nix expression". Like if you have a webapp with a nix devshell but want to start the docker postgres container for development? You can do that too, yes.
      - mekster 4y ago
        I can easily install many apps hosted at the Docker hub but how would I achieve that without Docker hub, unless everyone starts hosting things elsewhere but that'll take a good while assuming the community's consensus is to ditch Docker altogether.
        ParetoOptimal 4y ago
        > I can easily install many apps hosted at the Docker hub but how would I achieve that without Docker hub, I'm sorry, I don't understand what you mean.
- mort96 4y ago
  Podman is pretty good, and more or less a drop-in replacement.
  - hashtag-til 4y ago
    Yep, already wrote an internal guide for my whole team to move away from docker into podman+quay.io by the end of next week. Works like a charm on our macbooks, very neat. Even if we need to pay, I’m looking for alternatives not Docker Inc. - There is only so much you can take. I don’t want to rely on them anymore.
    - halostatue 4y ago
      Any chance of seeing a version of that guide outside of your organization?
- gpm 4y ago
  Someone on lobste.rs mentioned quay.io (maintained by redhat) as an alternative to dockerhub. Anyone have any experience with it?
  - sofixa 4y ago
    It started as a CoreOS project and for a long time it was the only ebterprisey registry, and it included security scanning. Had some availability issues some time ago, but AFAIK today it's pretty good.
    - bravetraveler 4y ago
      The software is nice, if looking to run your own - I'd recommend it over the typical Docker-provided incantation Way more enterprise appropriate, for example - granular control on caches
  - bigiain 4y ago
    Given the CentOS shit, I'm not convinced jumping from Docker Inc to RedHat is appropriately mitigating the risk of a corporate rug pull once they've decided its time for the next step in their enshittification plan...
sitzkrieg 4y ago
im looking forward to hipster posts about compiling and running your stack directly on a machine. probably one, and it'll be faster. that'll be great
- Kwpolska 4y ago
  Nah, Docker/containers are here to stay. But Docker, Inc. isn’t.
- bigiain 4y ago
  No no no, you build your stack, transpile it to WASM, and run it on your user's phones! WebRTC to run a distributed shared database across every phone that's not behind NAT! No servers. No databases. No electricity bills. Your backend hardware fleet automatically updates itself every couple of years _and pays_ for it itself!
- julianlam 4y ago
  Wait, that's hipster now? Isn't that a graybeard thing?
themitigating 4y ago
If you run a company wouldn't it be cheaper to just pay. This can't be worth the trouble changing everything
- bigiain 4y ago
  Sure. This is just a big "fuck you" to non company supported open source projects, as it turns out even ones labelled "sponsored css" on Docker Inc's own website. Which are all clearly insignificant and unimportant, dumb little command line utilities and libraries like, say, curl... https://github.com/docker/hub-feedback/issues/2314#issuecomment-1471905927 https://github.com/docker/hub-feedback/issues/2314#issuecomm...
  - julianlam 4y ago
    Hi, ah... perhaps I'm an idiot for asking, but why does a near-ubiquitous system utility like curl need to be installed via a container? Is it not available on something like Alpine... and if so, then maybe it should be? It's like saying I have to install `vi` via Docker... please don't tell me vim has a Docker hub repo too...
hgsgm 4y ago
Please share a copy of that email.
- Symbiote 4y ago
  Docker is sunsetting Free Team organizations Free Team organizations are a legacy subscription tier that no longer exists. This tier included many of the same features, rates, and functionality as a paid Docker Team subscription. After reviewing the list of accounts that are members of legacy Free Team organizations, we’ve identified yours as potentially being one of them. If you own a legacy Free Team organization, access to paid features — including private repositories — will be suspended on April 14, 2023 (11:59 pm UTC). Upgrade your subscription before April 14, 2023 to continue accessing your organization. If you don’t upgrade to a paid subscription, Docker will retain your organization data for 30 days, after which it will be subject to deletion. During that time, you will maintain access to any images in your public repositories, though rate limitations will apply. At any point during the 30-day period, you can restore access to your organization account if you upgrade to a paid subscription. Visit our FAQ [1] for more information. [1] https://web.docker.com/rs/790-SSB-375/images/privatereposfaq.pdf https://web.docker.com/rs/790-SSB-375/images/privatereposfaq...
  - saurik 4y ago
    This is the exact quote that was already up-thread of here, and they absolutely are not claiming they "never said that"; instead, they are clarifying that "organization data" does not include "public images", and while that's confusing, I can appreciate why they didn't think it would be and--lo and behold--they are publicly apologizing for being so confusing and taking the hit for having done so.
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
    - bigiain 4y ago
      Its the very next sentence after that one that they are claiming has been practically universally "misunderstood". "If you don’t upgrade to a paid subscription, Docker will retain your organization data for 30 days, after which it will be subject to deletion. During that time, you will maintain access to any images in your public repositories, though rate limitations will apply." The cynical devil on my left shoulder is telling me "Some smartass in an emergency meeting noted the ambiguity in that second sentence, and suggested lets just claim that 'During that time you will maintain access to any images' did not actually mean it's obvious implication that 'after that time you will no linger have access to any images' and this is all just a big misunderstanding" - and that how we ended up with this new "clarification". The even more cynical devil on my right shoulder is telling me some actively evil asshole intentionally wrote that ambiguous sentence to give themselves a 'get out of jail card' in case complaints went viral...

gilrain 4y ago

[flagged]

LASR 4y ago
Organizational gaslighting? I personally hate the term “gaslighting”, but it could be apt here.
dang 4y ago
Maybe so, but please don't post unsubstantive comments to Hacker News.
- actually_a_dog 4y ago
  I’d say that’s a very substantive comment. The fact that you don’t want to hear it does not affect the substance. Of course, I realize I’m saying this on a site that literally makes unpopular comments harder to read lol, and where I’m only allowed to post ~5 comments at a time, meanwhile nobody will tell me why.
  - dang 4y ago
    > nobody will tell me why https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29042583 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29042583 Edit: I just took a look at your recent comments and they seem mostly fine—and some are very good (thank you!), so I've removed the rate limit from your account. I'm taking a bit of a risk in doing that but if you'd meet us halfway in good faith, that should be more than enough to solve the problem.

eternalban 4y ago

That depends on what "organization data" means. Does that phrasing cover the images or just the existence of the organization in Docker (i.e. deleted organization)?

gpm 4y ago
> During that period you will maintain access to any of your public images. Pretty unambiguously means "after that period you may not have access to any of your public images".
- eternalban 4y ago
  Isn't that like a service like Github saying 'you will maintain access to any of your public projects' as in administrative access to one's own projects. After that period, you are no longer the owner of that repo and you no longer have "access". So I can still clone your github project but alas you no longer can commit to it. https://docs.docker.com/docker-hub/orgs/ https://docs.docker.com/docker-hub/orgs/ https://hub.docker.com/orgs https://hub.docker.com/orgs
  - wholinator2 4y ago
    Doesn't sound like it to me. If they meant "administrative access" they should have said "administrative access". They didn't, they just said "access" which unambiguously means just "access". Would've been very easy for them to make a one word correction somewhere in the dozen or so people who should have read this before it went out. But they didn't, they just said "access". If they wanted unambiguous meaning, they could have easily just said what they meant. Methinks that's exactly what they did
    - eternalban 4y ago
      Well, methinks otherwise. Lack of access does not mean files deleted. Organization data deleted means account deleted. Contention here was the claim that they have done a uturn but they never said they will delete images. This entire somewhat useless thread is about whether lack of access actually meant images deleted. (Administrative is a word that I used in my comment and a red herring to pick on, quite frankly.)

mikesir87 4y ago

(from Docker DevRel team) > Given these statements directly contradict each other Actually... they aren't contradictory. The organization data will be retained for 30 days and is subject to deletion. That data includes the teams, memberships, etc. But, it wasn't clear what we were going to do about the images. Keeping the public images is important as many other images build on top of them. > It feels like they changed the actual strategy We recognize it might feel that way, so apologies. But, that's part of where we are recognize it wasn't clear the technical details... we didn't talk at all about the images. After the feedback, we recognized this, so wanted to make that clear.

bragr 4y ago
>Actually... they aren't contradictory. They are. Your intent may not have been contradictory, but the messages received by everyone else were contradictory. You should own that if you are serious about doing better. Your intent doesn't really matter in these situations.
- travisjungroth 4y ago
  Yeah, really weird that after an apology announcement they’re still defending the original message at all. Not too hard to say “Yes, those messages contradict each other. The first one did not communicate our actual plan. The second message is a correction and clarification.”
- chasil 4y ago
  It is important to understand that most corporations do not apologize, ever, unless there is a direct threat to cash flow. This behavior is now demonstrated, it is the desired relationship, and it will be the baseline, all protestations aside. The apology is meaningless. If this is not what you want, then take steps to limit the damage done to you, and do it now.
- xboxnolifes 4y ago
  That's.... why they are saying it was poor communication.

incangold 4y ago

Reminds me of the gaslighting of the D&D community recently around changes to the license there. It’s like watching a five year old who’s convinced he can fool his parents.

pizzaknife 4y ago
sorry what d&d license change?
- ekidd 4y ago
  WotC tried to retroactively revoke an open gaming license that had been in widespread use since 2002. They had a legal theory why they could do this, but that theory contradicted quite a few public statements they had made on record. IP lawyers had very mixed opinions. Many TT-RPG players enjoy reading rules carefully and figuring out fun ways to "exploit" them. So everyone jumped on WotC's changes and dissected the implications. And many companies in the larger ecosystem quickly announced plans to ship their own games competing with D&D. WotC decided to back down and to just use Creative Commons, which largely resolved the immediate issue.

djha-skin 4y ago

rolls eyes OR, their marketing and DevRel departments and their engineering departments simply had a miscommunication; when it was realized, the present post was composed. This kind of thing happens inside companies all the time, including the one you're probably working at right now. No need to get up in arms over it.

hgsgm 4y ago
People who are busy working aren't going to rush to HN to post about how they understood the announcement and are reacting as needed. People who are bored (like me) will post rants and accusations.
worksonmine 4y ago
I don't believe it was a miscommunication. Even if it was a company as important as Docker inc, mentioning DELETING containers requires some care and should raise some flags at any serious communications department. This is not just the wrong date for a convention in the newsletter. What impact does it have on the ecosystem they've built? Some really serious projects use Docker and even if they have their own repositories can they be sure the software they rely on can keep publishing containers? Even at the tiny startups I've worked on I'm asked to proofread any technical stuff they want to publish, I assume Docker does too.
- bombcar 4y ago
  This is why I believe that they changed what would happen after the pushback and are trying to hide that they changed. In reality they were probably just going to disable access to updating all along and then maybe someday delete things, but didn’t want to say exactly that.
  - julianlam 4y ago
    The thing is, if images are still accessible, then they still incur egress costs for Docker, thus negating the potential cost savings from this move. So at best, they just tanked their reputation for... minimal cost savings?

mmcnl 4y ago

You are right, it's two different messages. I always am annoyed by how companies apologize for the communication or the confusion arising after the communication. As if we, the public, didn't understand properly or are too dumb to understand what they tried to say. We understood perfectly and the _message_ was dumb, not the communication around the message. It doesn't feel like an honest apology.

saurik 4y ago
Dude: "the message" is "the communication".
- bigiain 4y ago
  "No no no, the message in our contradictory communication is actually the message that you can interpret that contradiction with if you have this new piece of previously undisclosed information! How could you possibly have been confused by that? We are DevRel, we are communication professionals..."

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

tyingq 4y ago

Both sound like "you won't be able to update them", so images sort of permanently squatted and growing tech debt, potentially vulnerabilities, etc. They should really allow for configuring the ":latest" tag to raise a 404 or something if this is what all that means.

pmoriarty 4y ago
By replying on a tag for your security you're opening yourself up to vulnerabilities.
- tyingq 4y ago
  Relying? I was assuming a 404 for "latest" might cause people to look into what happened with the image and find it's new home. Without locking them out of specific versions if they needed them for some reason.

fulafel 4y ago

My first reaction to the news was "ok, net positive, unmaintained images will get cleaned up and break builds, and fewer people will then be bit by vulnerabilities in unknowingly used abanoned layers". But I guess not?