5 ms·
>The problem with this pair of assertions is that they neglect one essential aspect of Docker — one that is arguably its killer feature: its open API. Yes, tha
by jasode 12y ago
>The problem with this pair of assertions is that they neglect one essential aspect of Docker — one that is arguably its killer feature: its open API.
Yes, that Open API is great but it does not seem relevant to CoreOS's criticisms.
To me, Bryan Cantril's highlighting of "Open API" as a counterpoint would make sense if CoreOS specifically stated that they will create a "closed proprietary API". I didn't think they stated that as an architecture goal. CoreOS wants to create a non-monolithic container system -- and presumably, their alternative will also be an "Open API".
Docker's "Open API" for flexibility doesn't allow you to "undo" how Docker internals would run as a pid on Linux. I'm genuinely confused as to why this Open API was brought up. My current interpretation is that it is almost a non-sequitur.
- kcorbitt 12y agoYeah. My understanding of Rocket from the original blog post is that they don't have an "API" in the sense the Docker one is described at all. Since Rocket is just a container format/runner, there's no client/server relationship to document. You're running an executable on your system just like any other. I'm new to Docker, so maybe there are some big wins surrounding the docker client/server architecture that I'm not realizing. But I already have tools in place to run commands on a remote server -- that's not the problem that I'm looking to Docker to solve. So if Rocket is able to get the containerization aspect working smoothly with fewer moving pieces, I'll count that as a point in its favor. In fairness to Docker, I haven't had too much trouble so far pretending that "docker run" commands without the "-d" flag are just running the process in that PID. So the extra hidden complexity of really running it in another process and piping stdout back hasn't affected me in any negative way either.
- perlpimp 12y agoour team is running containers in boot2docker virtualboxes, rocket does not mention anything about being able to run on OS X visualization layer. so docker compatibility is paramount or a stable boot2docker alternative.
- robszumski 12y agoCoreOS runs on many VM platforms, Vagrant/Virtualbox being one of them. The current CoreOS kernel/userland (and most new kernels and Linux distros) is ready to run Rocket. Is that what you're looking for? https://coreos.com/docs/running-coreos/platforms/vagrant/ https://coreos.com/docs/running-coreos/platforms/vagrant/ (CoreOS employee)
- deleted 12y ago[deleted]
- wmf 12y agossh virtualbox rkt run? Personally, I find using docker to talk to a remote dockerd kind of unintuitive.
- tree_of_item 12y agoThe cynical response is that "open" is a relatively popular buzzword in software development circles, and writing a long post describing something you like as "open" in some way is an easy method of promoting it.