Docker's philosophy in a nutshell: 1) solve a painful problem with a simple tool. Ignore the purists criticizing the tech 2) get lots of happy users 3) gradually improve the tech without sacrificing simplicity 4) tech previously reserved for purists is now democratized 5) repeat
-
-
Replying to @solomonstre @justincormack
I like this approach as long as step 3 is actually possible and affordable. Sadly for many things that's not the case.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @RichFelker @solomonstre
Because of essential complexity? Or just lack of resource to simplify?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Or because step changes are hard?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Or improvements have to add complexity? You have done a very good job of limiting complexity in
@musllibc while working in a defined domain. Other code often has to also define the domain which can go either way.2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @justincormack @RichFelker and
Affordability varies, people often underestimate the affordability of complexity
1 reply 1 retweet 1 like -
I was thinking from a financial standpoint of being able to afford to go back and fix rather than perpetually chasing new requirements.
4 replies 0 retweets 2 likes
The way runc spinoff and rootless runc went though suggests to me Docker is doing lots of this right.
-
-
Trying to! So much more to do...
0 replies 0 retweets 1 likeThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.