[0xbadcafebee]

K8s is the opposite. It's proprietary, insular, not compatible with anything else, tightly coupled, not layered, not backwards compatible, etc. It has network services, logging, auth, etc, but so does literally every other system in the world, that doesn't make them all identical.

K8s is popular because it's free, has a lot of bells and whistles, and was made by Google. Otherwise nobody would use it. It's basically a larger, slightly less crappy Jenkins.

[verdverm]

> K8s is the opposite. It's proprietary, insular, not compatible with anything else

Not accurate, k8s is open source and every major tech company is developing or using it. There are a large number of companies building on top of it as well.

- https://github.com/kubernetes (open source)

- https://landscape.cncf.io/ (huge ecosystem)

- https://k8s.devstats.cncf.io/d/9/companies-table?orgId=1 (count of contributions by company)

> It's basically a larger, slightly less crappy Jenkins.

What? This is not even remotely accurate. Where did you come to this opinion?

K8s replaced mesos/marathon, which was the dominant open source orchestration system at the time. Jenkins is a CI system and can run on k8s. There is also JenkinsX that is trying to be the yaml driven, k8s native platform, but I think it missed the mark. There are better k8s native CI/CD systems like the Argo projects

[0xbadcafebee]

Proprietary as in, relates only to itself, not compatible with anything other than itself. It's a monolith with no standards. You have to write custom software to make anything work with it. Nothing just works with k8s out of the box, because it provides no loosely coupled standard interface that remains backwards-compatible. It has an API that becomes obsolete every 9 months.

Jenkins and K8s do effectively the same thing. They're both monolithic applications (in K8s' case it's a monolith of microservices, but same difference), both have a manager/worker (formerly master/slave) architecture, both run arbitrary workloads, load secrets, store and retrieve logs from your workload, schedule them to execute on worker nodes that you configure, manage users and permissions, etc, etc. They're functionally extremely similar: distributed centralized systems designed to execute arbitrary tasks. The difference is mostly technical. Ironically, Jenkins is the more flexible of the two, with much more stable interfaces.

People in tech think in terms of cargo-cult imaginary categories, like an "orchestration system" - which isn't a computer science concept. Schedulers are, operating systems are, but "orchestrators" are not. It's a term made up to sell a product, like a configuration management engine (Terraform) or an application workload scheduler (K8s). Very different things that people use the same word ("orchestrator") for because it sounds cooler, but doesn't mean anything.

[dilyevsky]

> It's proprietary, insular, not compatible with anything else, tightly coupled, not layered, not backwards compatible, etc.

Is this a joke post? It's literally the opposite of all those things