7 ms·

so what's the gap here with docker? what incorrect assumptions would i make from assuming this as a model for containers, if anyone knows

• cle 6y ago
  The gap is that it's skipping half of what makes Docker powerful, and what isn't really discussed in this conversation at all either. Distribution. E.g. see this line of code: https://github.com/p8952/bocker/blob/master/bocker#L25 https://github.com/p8952/bocker/blob/master/bocker#L25 "But I thought bocker implements Docker?" It doesn't, it only attempts to implement the "Docker daemon" part, and piggy-backs on Docker registries for image distribution. This is a huge part of the power of Docker, and why Docker isn't "just cgroups and namespaces". Cgroups and namespaces are a critical element, but Docker is much more than that too--it's also a set of standards for distributing and administering configuration+data for cgroups and namespaces.
  • barbecue_sauce 6y ago
    So many people don't seem to understand that artifact distribution is the compelling feature of Docker.
    • imtringued 6y ago
      And if you want to have artifacts you also need a way to build them... Running containers is just one third of the features that docker offers.
      • gwd 6y ago
        Exactly. Containers were around for at least a decade before Docker, just like mp3's were around for decades before the iPod. Docker's simple, efficient way to package containers were the key to their explosion.
        • irishsultan 6y ago
          > , just like mp3's were around for decades before the iPod That sounded wrong intuitively, so I decided to look it up: Wikipedia claims that mp3 was initially released in 1993, and the iPod was initially released in 2001, so not decades and not even a full decade.
          • gwd 6y ago
            Thanks for the correction. For some reason I thought that the patents on mp3 compression were issued in the 80's, but there's nothing in the Wikipedia article which specifically says that. The point stands though, that Docker didn't invent containers by a long shot; but they did make them massively more useful.
  • tyingq 6y ago
    I'd argue that bocker makes that more clear. It takes away any idea that the magic is in the containers. To the degree that it is, Linux provides that...not Docker. It helps focus on what Docker does provide, as you mention.
    • cle 6y ago
      Right that's a reasonable claim. bocker makes false claims though, which causes a bunch of confusion (which seems to be the case for the person I was replying to). "Docker implemented in around 100 lines of bash." This is simply not true.