TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

Moby: An open-source project to advance containerization

209 点作者 craneca0大约 8 年前

15 条评论

mdekkers大约 8 年前
I have a real issue with Docker Marketing Speak bullshit. &quot;Democratizing containers&quot;? When were they not democratic? What were they before? Tyrannical? or - <i>gasp</i> - communist? And now they are going to <i>ADVANCE THE SOFTWARE CONTAINERIZATION MOVEMENT</i> what does that even mean. Hacker News commenters tend to be pretty smart, and at the time I am posting this, most comments are along the lines of &quot;eh? say what now?&quot; When their core consumers don&#x27;t understand the message, you can bet your hat that they are not the real target of the message. Or the people at Docker are not good at marketing, which I find harder to believe.
评论 #14143931 未加载
评论 #14142009 未加载
评论 #14141078 未加载
评论 #14141420 未加载
评论 #14151711 未加载
评论 #14141291 未加载
评论 #14141760 未加载
评论 #14186263 未加载
评论 #14141152 未加载
评论 #14141160 未加载
shrikrishna大约 8 年前
A marketing-speak filtered out version of this announcement: You will be able to assemble your own docker engine by stripping out components you don&#x27;t need (that have until now been shipped in a single docker binary) and keeping the ones you do. This is like assembling PCs, for docker.<p>I think this was mainly intended as an answer to the criticism docker has been receiving (by kubernetes maintainers and others) ever since they decided to ship swarm with docker. I think this move is great as it goes a step further and allows you to swap out build systems, volume mgmnt too. Even though I did not mind docker shipping with swarm, others in the community were, and this shows docker listened, which is great.<p>EDIT: grammar fix
评论 #14146111 未加载
shykes大约 8 年前
This is a transcript of a keynote I just gave at Dockercon. But the keynote had in-depth demos and the blog post doesn&#x27;t. It will make more sense with the demos.<p>I will try to summarize: when we build Docker for Mac, Docker for Windows, Docker for AWS etc, we assemble a lot of individual components into a complete platform. Then we pack that platform into a bootable artifact for the target environment. That&#x27;s a lot of work, and it gets harder as the number of targets multiply. We developed a framework to make this more efficient. That framework has become the de-facto upstream of the Docker platform - it sits between the individual upstream projects and the finished product. So we&#x27;re open-sourcing it as Moby, moving all of our open-source process under it, and inviting the community to come play. Think of it as the &quot;Fedora of Docker&quot;.<p>Here&#x27;s more technical details from the readme: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;moby&#x2F;moby&#x2F;blob&#x2F;moby&#x2F;README.md" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;moby&#x2F;moby&#x2F;blob&#x2F;moby&#x2F;README.md</a><p>TLDR: - If you&#x27;re a Docker user, nothing changes: Docker remains the same - If you&#x27;re a Docker open-source contributor, you&#x27;re now a Moby contributor. Everything is basically the same, except more modular and more open, and you are less tied to Docker. - If you&#x27;re building non-Docker container platforms, it&#x27;s easier to share components and ideas with the Docker community, without being forced into anything you don&#x27;t like.<p>The Moby tooling itself is pretty neat: you define all the components in your system (including the OS and hypervisor, if required), then pack them into the artifact of your choice. For example you can assemble LinuxKit+ContainerD+Redis into a tiny &quot;RedisOS&quot;, and then boot it straight from bare metal; or virtualize it with HyperKit and run it on a Mac; or virtualize it with HyperV and run it on Windows. Moby does all of this for you automatically (this is one of the keynote demos).<p>We also showed a &quot;Kubernetes in a box&quot; assembly, to show that you don&#x27;t have to stick to Docker-built components.
评论 #14142073 未加载
评论 #14144458 未加载
评论 #14146121 未加载
评论 #14143627 未加载
评论 #14144101 未加载
djsumdog大约 8 年前
I too am confuzzled by this. I&#x27;m at a Docker shop where we currently run on DC&#x2F;OS and Marathon. I think the most confusing thing about Docker right now are all the different scheduling and networking frameworks (DC&#x2F;OS which adds a web ui to mesos and marathon, Kubernetes, Nomad, CoreOS&#x2F;Fleet, etc).<p>None of these systems scale up from a single 1 node system to a full distributed cluster. Here was my attempt of trying to get DC&#x2F;OS to run in a minimal cluster on Digital Ocean:<p><a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;penguindreams.org&#x2F;blog&#x2F;installing-mesosphere-dcos-on-small-digital-ocean-droplets&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;penguindreams.org&#x2F;blog&#x2F;installing-mesosphere-dcos-on-...</a><p>We use DC&#x2F;OS at work and the web UI frequently transfers over 1MB of json a second and the failed containers tab can max out CPU at 100% O_o<p>Marathon, Kubernetes, Nomad and Swarm all have their own orchestration json files in totally different formats. It gets more confusing with you take about pluggable network layers (WeaveNet, Flannel).<p>I&#x27;d _like_ to think Docker is trying to bring some standardisation to clusters, networking and scheduling ... but I&#x27;m not sure if that&#x27;s the case.
评论 #14143938 未加载
评论 #14145331 未加载
评论 #14140903 未加载
rubiquity大约 8 年前
If I understand this right it sounds like Moby will be a grab bag of components you can use to create your own container platform. This means the Docker that we know of before today is an implementation of Moby plus some other things (GUIs, SDKs, etc) that they hope to strip out.<p>Like others, I found the press release incomprehensible so the pull request linked to in the docker&#x2F;docker README is where I&#x27;m drawing this understanding from: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;moby&#x2F;moby&#x2F;pull&#x2F;32691" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;moby&#x2F;moby&#x2F;pull&#x2F;32691</a><p>As far as why I think Docker might be doing this:<p>It seems like a continuation of a similar strategy that they did with containers in the first place back when they were known as dotCloud. Rather than continue to compete with Heroku as a PaaS they found it better to open source their container technology and start a container movement (for lack of a better word).<p>Now that the container movement has happened there are a lot of competing tools at the container runtime (Docker, rkt, systemd-nspawn, lxc, etc.) and management (Swarm, Kubernetes, Mesos, Nomad, various ones that delegate to AWS ECS, etc.) levels. Rather than compete with all of those they are pushing themselves up a layer of abstraction to make it easy for companies to create their own container management tools specific to their needs.
deizel大约 8 年前
As I understand it (though I could be wrong) - this repository (in relation to the old one) is intended to be a parent.<p>Rather than having just the Docker engine, it will coordinate docker, swarmkit, infrakit, linuxkit in a single project.<p>These will be swappable, so for example you could a) swap swarmkit for Kubernetes, b) swap linuxkit for Debian, c) swap infrakit with Terraform.<p>Like &quot;Docker for Mac&#x2F;Windows&#x2F;AWS&#x2F;Azure&#x2F;GCE&quot;, etc. already exist - Moby will likely house all these variations and allow the creation of custom &quot;Docker&#x2F;Other for X&#x2F;Y&#x2F;Z&quot;.
chatmasta大约 8 年前
wtf? So the docker project is now &quot;moby&quot;? And I have no idea what the major changes are? How is this going to affect my usage of docker? The readme is incredibly confusing and lists no concrete features, especially none that justify reorganizing the entire docker project so drastically. It took me 5 minutes just to realize that github.com&#x2F;docker&#x2F;docker now redirects to github.com&#x2F;moby&#x2F;moby.<p>Is this really necessary? Seems like it&#x27;s just going to create tons of confusion.
评论 #14140707 未加载
评论 #14140225 未加载
评论 #14140920 未加载
jbergstroem大约 8 年前
Thinking marketing split? Docker is the product you pay for and Moby is &quot;may break, use at own risk&quot;.
评论 #14144437 未加载
educar大约 8 年前
Can someone do a eli5 ? I don&#x27;t understand what the product is.
评论 #14140287 未加载
评论 #14139978 未加载
newsat13大约 8 年前
I cannot help but think that Docker the company is in deep trouble reading such product announcements. It&#x27;s incomprehensible.<p>That said, what do I know. The folks at docker are brilliant marketers (with a great product). The marketing is the main reason docker is so wildly popular.
willejs大约 8 年前
So, their breaking up the monolith? Hold on to your hat!
pzduniak大约 8 年前
I was pretty sure something was broken when I was browsing Docker docs and suddenly I ended up in a moby&#x2F;moby repo.
asimpletune大约 8 年前
I don&#x27;t really understand this, but I think the special feature from Dockercon will help explain.
kentt大约 8 年前
Didn&#x27;t Docker already have a project called Moby? Is this the same thing?
评论 #14141112 未加载
评论 #14161233 未加载
tjfontaine大约 8 年前
I can&#x27;t stop reading this as Mooby -- the golden calf. <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;kevin-smith.wikia.com&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Mooby_the_Golden_Calf" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;kevin-smith.wikia.com&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Mooby_the_Golden_Calf</a>