I agree that the developer program ToS is written in a confusing manner and suggests that you can't use it all for production without a license. I expect that to be intentional: if the impression you get is that you can't even use their software in production, it's much less likely that you will do so with the impression that there is any support, warranty, or endorsement of such use.
[EDIT: I made an error, I originally said that it was explicit about no license being granted for the software, but that was about things like no license for service marks and trade names.]
On the other hand, there is a license for postgres-operator and it looks like Apache 2.0:
For what's being distributed in their Docker container image, I imagine it depends on what they're actually distributing for that to matter. I expect that it's mostly other people's software (like PostgreSQL) and that the Docker page listing the container just too much of a summary to say anything about licensing. I'd investigate that further to clarify license status prior to use, but expect it to not be legally constrained to non-production use only.
[EDIT: I made an error, I originally said that it was explicit about no license being granted for the software, but that was about things like no license for service marks and trade names.]
On the other hand, there is a license for postgres-operator and it looks like Apache 2.0:
https://github.com/CrunchyData/postgres-operator/blob/master...
For what's being distributed in their Docker container image, I imagine it depends on what they're actually distributing for that to matter. I expect that it's mostly other people's software (like PostgreSQL) and that the Docker page listing the container just too much of a summary to say anything about licensing. I'd investigate that further to clarify license status prior to use, but expect it to not be legally constrained to non-production use only.