When the english first attempted to colonize australia to Australia, an englishman noticed a native 'bush turkey' was not regularly eaten by the local native aboriginals. The englishman had tried to cook and eat them, but it ended up anything but tastey.
He asked one of the tribal elders the secret to eating them, the elder responded.
"You put a stone into the pot, you bring it to boil When its boiling you throw in the plucked bush turkey, you eat it when the stone is soft."
The lesson I take from this is "sometimes things are just going to be bad, you just gotta accept that and move on".
My interpretation of grandparent as applied onto that story was that some of their colleagues had some local solutions that were part of the puzzle and OP purposefully created some ancillary solution (the “stone soup”) to get them to contribute to the bigger picture. But perhaps I’m seeing this entirely wrong?
Maybe for you but LXC is very useful for deploying development environment isolated for each developers. systemd-nspawn is quite simple but LXC provides tooling that makes operations easier.
Docker and LXD serve different purposes. Docker is meant for an app to be run isolated but LXD can run a whole OS.
LXC did this nicely, imho, by storing the state and configuration of each container as files in a directory. It doesn’t seem like LXC/LXD has really taken off (see also: bzr) — bad luck Canonical, but thank you for trying.
Relating to both LXC vs Docker, and Docker vs Podman: oftentimes, the presence of competition is what drives the winner to victory. It might seem like wasted effort to have two competing solutions for a while but the final outcome of a winner that’s better than it would have been is of benefit to everyone. If I had a dollar for every project I started at work just to stone-soup one of my peers into action I would have more than… $20? $50?