Hacker News Reader

Hacker News

Comment by atlgator | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

atlgator

Too late. We already ditched Docker for Podman. It was a lot easier than I expected.

View on HN

How does switching to Podman mitigate the problem of container image hosting that people were upset about?

lol true. but redhat does offe quay.io which is fine

It's starting to feel like Red Hat people are the ones amp'ing all this up.

Lots of replies related to image hosting. We still base our containers off the public images provided by docker hub, but our customized images are stored in a private Azure container registry. This is more due to the high security of our environment than anything else. We cannot deploy from external sources.

But most projects are still published to dockerhub aren't they? Or was this only for hosting of your own private images?

This was about public images for free docker organizations (teams), used by many open source projects for branding / naming consistency.

I maintain one of the projects which moved to ghcr.io and have no interest in moving back, only further away. They have shown their hand and can no longer be trusted as good stewards or ecosystem participants imo

You do realize that you moving away is actually a win for Dockerhub, right?

Whole point of removing the free plan wasn't to squeeze money out from you, but to make you pay for the free storage and bandwidth. If you don't take up that free storage and bandwidth that is literally the same as removing your free plan.

I don't know how podman does container storing, but if everyone moves over you probably shouldn't expect them to have free tier forever.

EDIT: I would love to hear your counter arguments since you are downvoting. Why am I wrong?

You've fallen into the trap of an overly simplistic and narrow view.

When projects and people move away from DockerHub, it hurts Docker-the-company because it further decreases their already tenuous and evaporating relevance.

Reducing a fraction of storage and bandwidth costs isn't important compared to retaining mindshare and the perception of relevance.

Edit: @nextlevelwizard The explanation you requested has been provided. Now it seems you're disagreeing with a common, widely accepted phenomenon. I was hoping for a more collaborative interaction.

No company is moving anything. Individuals and some open source projects are moving. I am very surprised if this has any kind of effect.

My team has certainly accelerated the move away from Docker Hub towards our internal registries. And I don't see a reason to stop now. Just one fewer unreliable vendor for us to care about.

But you are still using docker. My company has always hosted our own repository for containers, that wasn’t the argument being made - it was that people and companies would move away from docker

Be sure to not use the free, open source Docker registry https://docs.docker.com/registry/deploying/ for internal registry hosting.

Why not?

Companies will leave if they cannot trust Docker Hub to keep their CI systems working. Scaring decision makers with technical issues and instability is a pretty big nono.

What company is pulling straight from docker hub anyway? You just blindly trust whatever is there?

We are pulling from Docker Hub, we're nobody special or big, but still. This shenanigan made us look for alternatives and consider the value the service provides - which didn't end in Docker Hubs favor.

When the community becomes frustrated, users start to leave the platform. Among these departing users are influential decision-makers who may lose trust in the platform and refrain from using it in the future. Additionally, some individuals publicly express their dissatisfaction and reasons for leaving. This creates a negative feedback loop, ultimately leading to the platform's decline.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com