> Should these “open collaborators” have caught the Free Team snafu before it happened? Perhaps. But the point with Docker, as with any company, is not what it

> Should these “open collaborators” have caught the Free Team snafu before it happened? Perhaps. But the point with Docker, as with any company, is not what it does at a given moment in time, but rather its general direction over time. There were HN threads looking at the overall direction Docker seems to be taking[1]. I'm personally not outraged, but the way it was communicated eroded a bit of trust. The FAQ that came after emphasized that no existing images will be deleted unless the maintainers delete them. Damage in trust is already done though. This article reads a bit weird to me though. Instead of also reporting on what open source maintainers thought about this (some are supportive), it reads more like PR damage control. With the way Docker rolled out these changes, this isn't a good look for Docker either. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35168802 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35168802