The personal attack wasn't ok, but please don't "pop up" on every thread to say predictable things. Pre-existing agendas are tedious, and tedium is what we all come here to avoid.
If we're here to avoid pre-existing agendas, then Docker and Kubernetes promotional articles tick every box on the "tedious" agenda.
The best part is, the article is about "no thanks" to Kubernetes, which I wholeheartedly agree with and have stuck to commenting relevantly to the topic, backed up by plenty of citations.
Perhaps those articles are tedious, but that's changing the subject. The point is that users who show up to grind the same axe in thread after thread are lowering the signal/noise ratio of the site, so we moderate them, and ban them if they won't stop.
It's not so much an axe to grind as it is a fight for better working conditions. If you had to go look for a job, and all everbody ran is this shitty Kubernetes and Docker, how would you feel being forced to work with that when you knew something better is available, but you couldn't find a job using it because everyone runs Linux, Docker and Kubernetes, because they don't know any better? How would you raise awareness about better alternatives with the goal of creating better working conditions and better jobs?
I mentioned our talk to my coworker, his immediate response was "does he work for Oracle?"
I'm only half seriously asking but, do you? (Given the certifications you mentioned, I think that even if you don't, there is a vague subjective case that you do...)
I apologise, I thought that was a fair question and civil...
The missing context from another comment was:
> ... amount of institutional inertia I've come up against while trying to get any part of our Development or Production stack shifted over to Kubernetes, which I consider myself fairly expert in, I think you'd understand that "containers on Solaris" is not going to go over any better for me than containers on GNU/Linux,
Both SmartOS and GNU/Linux are open platforms, so it really wasn't fair of me to accuse a person of shilling for Oracle. I think I understand.
(That wasn't my intention, but if you read it that way, that's my mistake.)
You didn't accuse me of working for Oracle; your coworker implied it, but it also shows how little she or he is versed in the subject matter: the very reason top Solaris kernel engineers work at Joyent is that they vehemently oppose the Oracle corporation; it's that same reason why OpenSolaris was forked into illumos, from which SmartOS is built. Please let your coworker know my answer.
That is the answer I was looking for. And also shows what I know, as I just learned that SmartOS is not the same as OpenSolaris. (Thanks!)
> I‘m against object oriented programming.
I just went back and read your profile again. Just wondering, what do you support instead? (At a guess I'd say functional programming?)
I've often heard and suspected for myself after gaining some "industry experience" that the Object-Oriented principles taken by themselves without a strong lead designer who is vocal about (his or her) strong opinions and willing to call out bloated, poorly thought-out designs... will simply tend toward generating a Big Ball of Mud, or "Shanty-town" code.
Is this generally how you feel about the subject? I think we'd probably get along well and I'd certainly like to hear from you again.
I'm against object oriented programming because the code written in that way is needlessly complex and unmaintainable. Experience taught me that procedural, respectively the functional approach produce code which is easy to understand and therefore debug and maintain.
