4 ms·

Will you continue supporting Ubuntu / Non-redhat kernel versions as well as previously? Or does this portend a move like what happened with Gluster?

KenCochrane 13y ago
Yes, we will still support Ubuntu, and other non-redhat kernel versions. This is basically just expanding our current abilities to include areas where we didn't have great support before. The goal is to have Docker running on all linux platforms, so that everyone can use it regardless of their distro choice.
shykes 13y ago
No, Docker is not becoming red hat - specific. From a technical standpoint this announcement means two things: 1) Docker 0.7 will run on vanilla kernels out of the box. This means virtually all distros will be supported. It also means wider support for hosting providers which don't allow custom kernels (Google Compute Engine for example). 2) Future versions of Docker will optionally support some of the technology used by Red Hat - most prominently libvirt-lxc and selinux. The more places you can use Docker, the more useful it is :) So we have no intention of locking it into a single distro or paas.
- SEJeff 13y ago
  I'm assuming by SELinux you mean the work ontop of SELinux for virtual machines and containers with libvirtd named sVirt[1]? [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/SVirt_Mandatory_Access_Control https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/SVirt_Mandatory_Acce...
  - shykes 13y ago
    That seems like the most probable path, although I can't speak for the people making that contribution. What I mean, regardless of how we actually implement, is having an elegant way to deploy containers in environments where the sysadmin relies on SELinux contexts and labels to implement security.
notacoward 13y ago
What do you mean by "what happened with Gluster"? Every project tends to be better packaged for some OSes/distros than others, based on the developers' own expertise. GlusterFS was a bit more rpm-friendly than deb-friendly since long before the acquisition. That hasn't gotten much better, unfortunately, but neither has it gotten significantly worse. There's enough software in the world that barely even runs on any distro other than Ubuntu. Is it really worth complaining every time that's not the case?
- shizcakes 13y ago
  It's a slightly case than what's presented here: different in that my previous company was paying for Gluster support - when RedHat purchased Gluster, they created a "storage product" and refused to support it unless we used "RedHat Storage Server" on Redhat and not Ubuntu. That was inconvenient.
  - notacoward 13y ago
    Ah, I see, you were talking about Gluster (the company) rather than GlusterFS (the project). Got it. Yeah, some of the stuff about Red Hat Storage and commercial support and "recommended configurations" is not my cup of tea either, and I'm on the GlusterFS development team at Red Hat. The upstream community project has a lot of potential that can be hard to reconcile with a cautious "what can we support with minimal training" mindset.

KenCochrane 13y ago

Yes, we will still support Ubuntu, and other non-redhat kernel versions. This is basically just expanding our current abilities to include areas where we didn't have great support before. The goal is to have Docker running on all linux platforms, so that everyone can use it regardless of their distro choice.

shykes 13y ago

No, Docker is not becoming red hat - specific. From a technical standpoint this announcement means two things: 1) Docker 0.7 will run on vanilla kernels out of the box. This means virtually all distros will be supported. It also means wider support for hosting providers which don't allow custom kernels (Google Compute Engine for example). 2) Future versions of Docker will optionally support some of the technology used by Red Hat - most prominently libvirt-lxc and selinux. The more places you can use Docker, the more useful it is :) So we have no intention of locking it into a single distro or paas.

SEJeff 13y ago
I'm assuming by SELinux you mean the work ontop of SELinux for virtual machines and containers with libvirtd named sVirt[1]? [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/SVirt_Mandatory_Access_Control https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/SVirt_Mandatory_Acce...
- shykes 13y ago
  That seems like the most probable path, although I can't speak for the people making that contribution. What I mean, regardless of how we actually implement, is having an elegant way to deploy containers in environments where the sysadmin relies on SELinux contexts and labels to implement security.

notacoward 13y ago

What do you mean by "what happened with Gluster"? Every project tends to be better packaged for some OSes/distros than others, based on the developers' own expertise. GlusterFS was a bit more rpm-friendly than deb-friendly since long before the acquisition. That hasn't gotten much better, unfortunately, but neither has it gotten significantly worse. There's enough software in the world that barely even runs on any distro other than Ubuntu. Is it really worth complaining every time that's not the case?

shizcakes 13y ago
It's a slightly case than what's presented here: different in that my previous company was paying for Gluster support - when RedHat purchased Gluster, they created a "storage product" and refused to support it unless we used "RedHat Storage Server" on Redhat and not Ubuntu. That was inconvenient.
- notacoward 13y ago
  Ah, I see, you were talking about Gluster (the company) rather than GlusterFS (the project). Got it. Yeah, some of the stuff about Red Hat Storage and commercial support and "recommended configurations" is not my cup of tea either, and I'm on the GlusterFS development team at Red Hat. The upstream community project has a lot of potential that can be hard to reconcile with a cautious "what can we support with minimal training" mindset.