Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

> It seems like it was a class of problems that you have fixed with "good devops process". I'd argue that it probably was a problem at once point, and you improved your devops process to make sure it wasn't.

It certainly was but we fixed it and it's not a problem anymore.

> Sounds like you could use some more of that "good devops process" you had when you set up the deploy machinery.

Yeah, there are people within my group that want to 'modernize' things and put them into containers willy nilly for no real reason.

We have already solved all the difficult problems that containers are supposed to 'save' us from. Many of the proposed containers would just be a single statically linked binary with a config file.

Why?

FYI, our stuff is hosted internally, so security considerations are not such a big deal.

To hear these container advocates, you'd think that till they came around no one ever managed to use linux.

I'm fully expecting linux userland tools to go away, to be replaced by custom 'distributions' with only a kernel and a docker API soon.




> I'm fully expecting linux userland tools to go away, to be replaced by custom 'distributions' with only a kernel and a docker API soon.

They're already here!

- CoreOS Container Linux (now owned by Redhat)[0]

- RancherOS[1]

- Kubic[2] (more focused on running Kubernetes, but same idea)

There are also tools like Linuxkit[3] which focus on helping you actually build images that run the containers you want and nothing else @ startup, which is pretty cool I think.

[0]: https://coreos.com/os/docs/latest/

[1]: https://rancher.com/rancher-os/

[2]: https://kubic.opensuse.org/

[3]: https://github.com/linuxkit/linuxkit




Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: