[notmars]

Oh the longing and despair of missing Docker Swarm... It was missing so little...it was so well done and simple, elegant. Docker Swarm is now the betacam of container orchestration solution. hopefuly all these layers (kube-> custom kube -> OA*) will soon converge and fold themselves into something grandiose, efficient and simple. How eager I am to be there :-)

[rektide]

Kube's main problem is that it's not quite grandiose enough, doesn't have a general encapsulation system.

So everyone which uses Helm. Which is ok, it works decently, but it's also, like, kind of a lot. The target that we've converged on is just a little too sophisticated to make shipping stuff accessible.

We need more grandiosity, in order to be adequately simple.

[cdrx]

Swarm isn't dead, it works just fine and is being actively maintained.

[nerdyyatrice]

I think that's the direction KubeVela is going

[antman]

Have you tried Nomad?

[linkdd]

Taken directly from the Nomad website[1]:

> Kubernetes and Nomad support similar core use cases for application deployment and management, but they differ in a few key ways.

> Kubernetes aims to provide all the features needed to run Docker-based applications including cluster management, scheduling, service discovery, monitoring, secrets management and more.

> Nomad only aims to focus on cluster management and scheduling and is designed with the Unix philosophy of having a small scope while composing with tools like Consul for service discovery/service mesh and Vault for secret management.

Compare Kubernetes Pods and Deployments to Nomad, and the full Kubernetes ecosystem to the full Hashicorp ecosystem please.

IMHO, Vault and Consul are very hard to operate correctly, at least as hard as a Kubernetes cluster on-premise (managed Kubernetes does not count).

[1] - https://www.nomadproject.io/docs/nomad-vs-kubernetes