Interesting read about why Docker failed.
https://www.infoworld.com/article/3632142/how-docker-broke-in-half.html
Sample: "The former CEO notes that all of these factors created 'natural tensions' as Docker grew. 'We wanted to build great community and monetize the developer product...' "
I can't decide whether the model of open source products that get VC funded and then go broke in 10 years is a good thing for open source or a bad thing. We get to keep the code, so that's nice, but that fever around monetizing open code....
bonifartius 𒂼𒄄
@klaatu i think docker will go the same way vagrant has gone. one time nearly everyone used it, now it's almost forgotten. my suspicion is that this is because they all try to do too much in the quest of being an easy tool.
the classic unix tools are still around (in one form or another), they are simple enough to understand them quickly and enable you to build things out of them which are bigger than the sum of their parts.
point in case: most docker containers use a shell script for all the serious setup stuff :)
@bonifartius Agreed! I think one thing the article skips over a little is the fact that Docker didn't actually bring that much to the table aside from marketing hype.
Anything I've ever done with Docker I was also able to do with LXC. I've had to interact with Docker very little.
I wouldn't be surprised if it fades away now that we have cri-o and podman and so on.