And also, who says that mis-designed features aren't bugs? In this case, they designed a bug, and shipped it.
Autoupgrading might totally be a misfeature for your usecase, but it's how this program works. If you don't want it to do that, then uninstall it.
Or how it doesn't work, in this case.
> If you don't want it to do that, then uninstall it
And use what? There are no alternatives. Should I quit my job while I'm at it? Maybe I can just downgrade it .... oh wait ..
This broke production environments. That is a bug.
Bugs can introduce new development to meet acceptance criteria, if that is the right way to solve the bug.
Edit: kelnos accurately pointed out that I should have said development environment, and not production.
Presumably it also would flawlessly autodeploy the fix for that bug when it gets released.
So, there was a bug. A UX bug. Bugs aren’t software-exclusive.
I may be misunderstanding your point.
What's the point of having versions if you can't install them?
I think auto-upgrades of Docker are totally fine if it makes the lives of Docker devs easier and they can concentrate on more meaningful things. After all, the majority of the user base is not paying a single cent for the software. If a paying customer complains about auto-upgrades and wants to buy into their own support branch, that's a different story.
I've no idea if Docker's auto-upgrades also include minor an major versions, though.
This broke development environments. I really hope no one is using Docker Desktop running on Mac in production.
Not to trivialize the issue; lost productivity due to a a bug in a software update sucks. But people are not getting irate customer phone calls or losing revenue because of product downtime due to this.
It could be an indirect cause of irate calls because there’s a bug in production but the dev environment is broken by Docker’s auto-update so the devs can’t work on a fix for the production bug.
If it breaks even just my desktop working environment, and that impairs my ability to remediate a production problem, it's causing production downtime. Dev environments aren't decorative.
It benefits everyone if we improve software. It benefits nobody if everyone never reports their problems and simply quietly disappears and quit their job when something in the software they use needs to be fixed -- and I think it's pretty obvious that course of action is unreasonable and unworkable.
If you don't like the way that convenience is provided to you, then yes, you don't need to use it, and that is not tantamount to telling you to give up and go move to Canada.
The developers have chosen to implement autoupdating.
That meant that in December they pushed a version which had a bug in it, and users received the bugged version. Then they pushed a version with a fix, and users received the version with the fix.
That doesn't seem worth throwing a tantrum over.
- Docker for Mac has no alternative.
- Docker for Mac periodically ships bugs that make the program (and Docker itself) unusable.
- Devs cannot downgrade -- so their workday can be productive and not wasted on fighting with the tool.
You seem to be implying that people are entitled. I suppose technically this can be true but Docker for Mac is viewed as a critical infrastructure and thus people should have venues to make it workable even if the latest version is bugged. They ask for choice and are against force automatic updating to the latest version.
> That doesn't seem worth throwing a tantrum over.
Such emotional reactions cast a doubt on whether you are arguing in good faith.