The bloody comment I replied to called it that, and it's not controversial. Docker did not suggest running in production for many years and the production stuff is largely an afterthought. Again, I developed this opinion from running it for years.
It was not intended for production usage from the beginning, as you claimed, but I'm already tired of responding to this thread because I'm turning instantly gray for not buying into Docker so why would I bother proving that you're not correct?
You called it that. Read what you wrote. Here, I'll paste your entire comment as it is now, since you keep editing it:
> Containers existed before Docker and will exist after Docker, and articles like these are desperate attempts to remind everyone of that in the face of Docker's unilateral destruction of the concept. I know I'm right because of comments like these that presuppose "well, if you're doing containers, use Docker, the alternatives just aren't there." Except they were, before Docker, and after Docker.
> Docker is a developer tool, not a container runtime. The 'containers' it presents require you to commit a daemon on every machine, commit to a weird storage and distribution story when, you know, files of containers served in a flat directory are totally adequate, and so on. Docker made extremely complicated choices for a lot of things and now everybody wishing to advance containers has to deal with presuppositions like these, where Docker exists and the motivation for not using it is unclear to a lot of people, you included.
See the first sentence in the second paragraph? That's you. You wrote that. You did not present it as an opinion, but as a fact.
I edit to add because I'm on a phone. Nothing you've (annoyingly) pasted has been touched since it was submitted the first time. Please take your overly aggressive abuse of me to someone who cares, and reread what moondev wrote:
> Docker is by far the more mature and adopted development tool.
That's him. He wrote that. I added to it with something that you disagree with, and I'm rapidly tiring of interacting with you because you're making it extremely hard to remain civil.
But since you're the expert on Docker's production intentions, could you perhaps discuss Swarm and how it compares against competitive technology in the field? We can start small: what kind of scheduler does Swarm employ? Two-level, optimistic? What is your understanding of the runtime and performance bounds of the selected scheduling strategy? What is the expected latency for scheduling decisions as the number of executing containers grows? How does Swarm handle failure to schedule?
Could we then compare that scheduler against Aurora, Marathon, Kubernetes, Omega, and Borg? Why do you feel that Docker is production ready in light of the competitive work being done in this space? What do you feel is the difference between Mesos and Aurora? Between Docker and Kubernetes? Since Docker is intended for production usage, can you elaborate on some of the challenges you've experienced running it in production?
The title is "Docker: the Linux container runtime." So, your assertion that "Docker is a developer tool, not a container runtime" is simply false.
The text clearly describes deployment of docker containers as much more than simple development tools: "docker can run on any x64 machine with a modern linux kernel - whether it's a laptop, a bare metal server or a VM. This makes it perfect for multi-cloud deployments." That sounds like production deployment to me.
Whether or not you like Docker, or think it works well in production, is immaterial to this. Docker is a container runtime, it is intended for production deployment, and that means it is not merely a development tool as you claimed. The first website Docker ever published is proof of Docker's intentions. It was intended as a production tool from the very beginning.
Docker was always intended to run in production. That was the goal from the beginning. The developers recommended against running it in production before the 1.0 release because it was in beta. Developers of many products that are intended to run in production do the same thing before the first stable version is released.
That is not the same thing as saying that Docker was never intended to be used in production, and was only ever intended to be a development tool. That's the view I'm arguing against, and it's not trivial -- it denies the fundamental purpose of Docker.
> Docker is a developer tool, not a container runtime.
It's just not true, and that's why I responded.