3 ms·

I think it is a great stand for Docker. Very recently (IMHO in 1.3), it merged the functionality of Fig into Docker. I think Docker orchestration and coreos ca

I think it is a great stand for Docker. Very recently (IMHO in 1.3), it merged the functionality of Fig into Docker. I think Docker orchestration and coreos can coexist - if I had to use COREOS to use the goodness of Docker, then systemd-nspawn would come and eat Docker's lunch. I wish that Docker bless one of Ansible/Chef as the official orchestration base and take it forward. I really don't want to earn something Docker specific.

monatron 12y ago
Fig functionality was not merged into Docker's 1.3 release. Ansible/Chef orchestration IMHO solves a very different problem than container orchestration.
- sandGorgon 12y ago
  You're right - I was referencing this bug here (https://github.com/docker/docker/issues/8637 https://github.com/docker/docker/issues/8637), but seems it was not merged into mainline. I agree that Chef and Ansible are different than container orchestration today - especially, when you look at low level stuff like networking, mounts, etc... But I guess what I was saying is that it is not hard to add these features to them. They already have a specification format that works well and check for idempotency at its core. Unless you mean something like etcd is fundamental to container orchestration, which I don't believe it is (we run a couple of containers in production using Fig)