Hi, I'm the founder of Docker. That is very surprising and absolutely not OK. I'm sorry that you experienced this. Could you contact me directly at [email protected] to give me more details?

There is no animosity towards kubernetes, quite the contrary. We are working with the kubernetes community to integrate the individual components of Docker, so that everyone can reuse each other's code and ideas.

For example:

- we're actively working on a containerd+CRI integration.

- there's great technical discussions about supporting CNI in SwarmKit

- we are participating in the early CSI (common storage interface) discussions along with the Mesos and Kubernetes communities.

- we are discussing the possibility of participating in the Kubernetes secrets implementation work, since we invested a lot in SwarmKit secrets and some of that work could be reused, or at least discussed for reference.

In short: no animosity. Not sure what happened to you at Dockercon but we will look into it.

Hi Solomon,

Thanks for responding. There really isn't many more details other than that. It was in DockerCon Seattle in the space needle. I don't remember who the employee was. I did generally get the feeling that Docker employees felt at least wary or worse about k8s. That was from more than just that once situation, but from multiple interactions I had over the conference with employees. I only pointed out that one interaction because it made me certain that at least that employee was more than wary.

I'm happily using Docker and it was a good conference otherwise.

>I did generally get the feeling that Docker employees felt at least wary or worse about k8s.

I'm no k8s fanboy (and I have the comment history full of replies from annoyed k8s contributors to prove it), but it's because they know that Kubernetes is going to end them. It relegates Docker to a swappable implementation detail.

thank u for not being a narc

you guys love snitches, huh

I didn't know the animosity level was that high. This is disturbing.

That's just silly. Kubernetes is an open source project too, and I don't think Google is making a ton of money from it.

Smaller vendors are making money from turnkey k8s. There are at least two I won't mention.

Docker is out on a limb with the dynamic mesh, nobody else is using the p2p gossip protocol that I know of and there are problems, and Docker paid-for support is just dropping tickets related to networking issues making this work. The service outages caused by mesh gossip problems are simply measureable by NewRelic free ping synthetic monitors. Docker is getting paid--they are falling down on support.

Consul is all p2p gossip, and it seems to be pretty popular.

That doesn't make it non-annoying. I am personally annoyed at the current state of the open source ecosystem where all the top open source projects are dominated by large tech co's.

These large companies are developing open source as a strategic asset but most people have no idea and just think they're being altruistic.

The reason this really sucks is because as a result, all the large projects backed by large companies kill of the alternatives which have very pure motivation. Just like react is replacing a pure open standards based way of web development. Sure, it's "open source", but this is not right.

> I am personally annoyed at the current state of the open source ecosystem where all the top open source projects are dominated by large tech co's.

It's fascinating how far we have come in the past 20 years. First the introduction of using opensource at work, then businesses starting to opensource things themselves, and here we are complaining that the top opensource projects are in fact backed by companies.

I understand your point, but it's also a luxury to be able to complain about this.

As far as I know they offer kubernetes environment in their cloud hosting services, so they may make some actual money out of it

Google does not need kubernetes to be successful or make any money to survive.

Docker, on the other hand........

Indirectly I think Google does need Kubernetes to be successful.

If they can drive adoption, it makes it much easier to move customers away from AWS and on to GCE.

Kubernetes benefits all parties. AWS can move customers away from GCE using Kubernetes, too. As a customer, you get more freedom and flexibility.

I'm surprised we still haven't seen a K8s solution from AWS yet. Their container engine looks OK, but K8s handles setting up internal LBs and has minikube for local development. The AWS app LB seems far behind.

I'm looking forward to them accepting defeat on this one and just natively supporting K8s like Google.

There are companies like CoreOS, Heptio trying to provide good Kubernetes support for AWS. Personally, I don't think all cloud providers _have to_ provide native Kubernetes support as it’s designed to be something users can roll out on their own regardless of the environment, or purchase services from companies in the ecosystem (like those I mentioned earlier). Today, there are many tools like kops that integrate well with AWS ecosystem and make it easier to install Kubernetes on AWS, which makes me think that users are happy enough without an official support from AWS. And that shows the strength of the community.

I admit to being a little surprised to hear that too. Certainly it's a polarizing topic, I'm sure, but I also went to a talk either by a Docker Captain or employee that spent five minutes talking about K8s, and not in a denigrating or discouraging way whatsoever.

This is why I hate SW business and I am very picky about services / software I use. I really dislike companies undercutting competition with practices like this.