[Alupis]

> The architecture is not monolithic. I want to break down Docker into the most discrete and composable parts possible

This is something I've witnessed a number of Docker employees do over and over on HN -- state Docker is or is not something currently, based on a future promise.

This statement is a contradiction. You state Docker is not monolithic -- but then the next sentence says you want to break Docker down into composable parts. Which is it?

[shykes]

> You state Docker is not monolithic -- but then the next sentence says you want to break Docker down into composable parts. Which is it?

It's both.

Docker is already quite modular. For example storage and execution backends are swappable using a driver interface. Image storage is a separate binary. Clustering and machine management are a separate binary. The primitives for interacting with kernel namespaces an cgroups are in a separate project called libcontainer. We are developing authentication and security features in a separate repo called libtrust.

And at the same time, I believe we can do better, and made it a high-level goal of the project to improve modularity. I am simply stating that high-level goal.