[kristopolous]

To be fair one is for demonstration purposes and the other is intended to be used. They seek the same protections regardless. It's kind of like how a $1,000 water filtration system wants the same legal protection that a $15 Brita does or heck, I'd assume if you got scammed with a fraudulent water filter that used orgone energy and crystals, it too would also want those legal protections.

You'd probably want to tread cautiously if someone doesn't use disclaimers - that's probably a more dangerous product.

[kazinator]

Sure, but in this case both Bocker and Docker just orchestrate features of Linux, which is where all the risks and complexity lies.

To verify that Bocker adds no additional issues is a smaller job than verifying Docker in the same way.

If there is some problem in the actual containerization, Bocker and Docker will be equally affected.

[okamiueru]

Isn't the argument presented here that just because two things have the same "no responsibility in event of failure"-clause does not mean likelihood of failure, robustness, battletesting, etc, are comparable? Or am I missing something