Why the systemd hate? Because it's a big monolithic project that takes over your system? You do realize that Docker is much more monolithic and opinionated than systemd, right?
When you ask questions, especially leading ones, it causes a good deal of confusion around the topic at hand. The reasons behind this are complex, but they have something to do with our tendency to double bind each other.
Someone has the right to say why something is "disqualified" for them, even if it is devoid of context. What is awesome here is that the leading expert for this topic is replying directly to the negative (empty) opinion and actually presents a (rich) alternate opinion.
How does you asking unanswerable questions contribute to resolving the conversation to something we can all learn from?
Regardless of their nature, questions are definitely a burden. However, I think the way some questions are put can cause a disproportionate amount of burden when they contain hidden meanings or agendas.
If someone is having issues being direct and use techniques to "hide" how they feel about something in a question, they effectively load the question with intent. I think sometimes those questions can be viral in nature, causing angry memes like what they mention in "This Video Will Make You Angry": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rE3j_RHkqJc
Logic would dictate that we should learn to avoid questions which cause excessive amounts of processing with little return in their answers. A simple way to filter on these is to ask if the question conflicts itself when answered in a given way.
Yes, but I will never have to use docker if I don't want to. For that matter, docker doesn't try to be cron, it doesn't want to handle mounting, didn't subsume udev, and doesn't encourage other project to link against it, and to drop all compatibility with non-linux systems. Systemd does, did, and is doing that right now.
Install deps, configure it, done. Looks straightforward, if a tad undocumented.
The thing is, the inside of a docker container is by definition indistinguishable from a regular linux install. Discourse isn't dependent on Docker, not the same way GNOME is dependent on systemd: It just encourages you to use it.
I'm curious what you mean by debug. If you mean monitor all of our apps send metrics, health checks, and logs over the wire I'm sure that is independent.
What would docker allow you over the unikernel especially given the best practice push for docker images to only run one thing in a container?
IMO with Unikernel Xen aka Hypervisors are the container holders instead of docker.
With a Docker container, I can exec into it and run strace, ltrace, gdb etc.. With a unikernel it all depends on what you have built into the unikernel. That might provide everything I need, or not. The issue is that we will need a lot of toolking to put unikernels on a sufficiently equal footing vs. being able to run decades worth of Linux tools directly in the containers.
The issue I have with that is the tooling you mention while stable and mature is actively being replaced by cloud tools because you really can't just debug a single machine in production when you have a cluster.. not to mention it is production so debug symbols might not even be available.
I understand your point of the maturity w/ tooling but I see it as a serious failure if you have to log into a machine in production and run gdb or IMO any tool. Your app can and should provide healthchecks/monitoring so that you can see if there is a problem (this includes even a thread stack dump).
I'm probably just biased and jaded as I have had some serious technical debt lost to Docker. It just feels like a VM on top of a VM on top of a VM of continuous things to break/learn... I want baremetal :)
> you really can't just debug a single machine in production when you have a cluster
Somehow I ended up debugging, tracing, monitoring and even hotpatching individual machines in the cluster. Yeah the easy problems will show up in the monitoring and logs. The harder ones won't.
Opinionated, yes. Monolithic, no. Huge mess of everything that deeply integrates in any system — of course not, your containers don't need to know anything about Docker and host system, you are absolutely free in choices. It's even possible to run (gasp!) multiple services with supervision inside Docker.
That's the first time I ever heard anybody argue that Docker isn't monolothic. It does everything inside it's single daemon executable. Compare against Rocket, which doesn't use a daemon, and uses separate executables for different tasks and stages.
Docker is monolithic, probably more so than it should be, but designed quite well, allowing for things like triton to exist. Systemd is monolithic, but does far more than docker, and really more than it should.
Someone has the right to say why something is "disqualified" for them, even if it is devoid of context. What is awesome here is that the leading expert for this topic is replying directly to the negative (empty) opinion and actually presents a (rich) alternate opinion.
How does you asking unanswerable questions contribute to resolving the conversation to something we can all learn from?