A new upstream project to break up Docker into independent components

Re:A new upstream project to break up Docker into independen... by jetsnoc on Thursday April 20, 2017 @11:57AM (#14157832)

I don't think your wrong. Someone being that entitled and ignorant must be the rare exception in 2017. Maybe I'm in a bubble too.

The conversation usually goes like this with my folk:

I get it, Moby is the OSS version and can be easily stood up and you don't see the need for extra cost. I'm glad you're trying to reduce expenses, but I don't mind paying for 24x7 Enterprise Support and it gives me piece of mind and priority escalation support.

Basically, I don't mind paying extra for a get out of jail free card if a whole swarm is offline.... I can tell the CEO we have the vendor partner engaged with a critical ticket and she can have piece of mind too. So, let's quote out the Enterprise version of Docker and evaluate the TCO of both solutions.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:A new upstream project to break up Docker into independen... by toomuchtodo on Thursday April 20, 2017 @12:06PM (#14157919)

It's also vital in non tech Fortune-size orgs to be able to lean on the vendor. Not having support is a deal breaker.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:A new upstream project to break up Docker into independen... by atgreen on Thursday April 20, 2017 @01:21PM (#14158740)

By calling Moby the "OSS version" you are implying that Docker EE isn't open source. Honest question... is it true that Docker EE contains proprietary code, or did you mean to say "community version"?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:A new upstream project to break up Docker into independen... by jetsnoc on Thursday April 20, 2017 @04:16PM (#14160417)

I probably should have written that as Community Version. I'm very uninformed when it comes to all of this and the Docker, Inc. ecosystem. Sorry about that :)

[ Parent | on HN ]