I appreciate the explanation. I feel like this doesn't justify the reaction I've been seeing from folks about it, though. That is, it feels like it's not so much Docker pissing off the engineers, but rather the engineers getting pissed off about it. The amount of money it costs is a rounding error if Docker is a core tool for your business.
We have so many real issues in tech to channel that energy on, like rampant sexism by well known engineers.
I have been a software professional since I was in high school in 1998. I'm enthusiastic about open source, and I really enjoy working in unusual software systems or within strange constraints.
Yeah,I think you’re right across the board with one minor exception:I don’t think folks always know what their engineers are using, and I suspect there will be some engineers who are in a legitimately difficult position.
There are also engineers who don’t know how to ask for what they need, and this may require them to have a difficult conversation.
I do think that this was a crappy way for Docker to get money without adding more value (they’re not giving anything new for the money, and most folks are just now learning this wasn’t the open source edition they had installed), but I agree it’s not that big of a deal.
The rate limiting thing was a much bigger issue, but Amazon helped everyone out with public registries.
While I agree that systemic misogyny and systemic racism (and the surrounding intersectionalities) in our field is massive and in need of attention, this is a huge shift in how one of the most commonly used tools. It’s like if you now had to pay royalties for your tool box if the construction site is large enough. It is worthy of critique and rebuke, it’s just not as big a deal as some have made it out to be.
We can handle multiple issues at a time (just like on production support!)
I don’t think folks always know what their engineers are using, and I suspect there will be some engineers who are in a legitimately difficult position.
There are also engineers who don’t know how to ask for what they need, and this may require them to have a difficult conversation.
That’s fair, however the people I’ve seen complaining about this change the most don’t come across as the people that need this kind of assistance. Highly anecdotal and scoped to my own field of view, admittedly.
While I agree that systemic misogyny and systemic racism (and the surrounding intersectionalities) in our field is massive and in need of attention, this is a huge shift in how one of the most commonly used tools. It’s like if you now had to pay royalties for your tool box if the construction site is large enough. It is worthy of critique and rebuke, it’s just not as big a deal as some have made it out to be.
My interpretation here is that the reactions to this change you and I have each observed have very different intensities. I’m talking about people I respect (not even just the usual suspects on HN) virtually frothing at the mouth over the change, which is why I made the comparison to more serious issues.
But that’s also the reason I asked here instead of asking those people about it directly. Based on their clearly passionate reactions, I couldn’t expect a dispassionate explanation.
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
I appreciate the explanation. I feel like this doesn't justify the reaction I've been seeing from folks about it, though. That is, it feels like it's not so much Docker pissing off the engineers, but rather the engineers getting pissed off about it. The amount of money it costs is a rounding error if Docker is a core tool for your business.
We have so many real issues in tech to channel that energy on, like rampant sexism by well known engineers.
To be clear, I realize I was probably preaching to the choir. 😄
Yeah,I think you’re right across the board with one minor exception:I don’t think folks always know what their engineers are using, and I suspect there will be some engineers who are in a legitimately difficult position.
There are also engineers who don’t know how to ask for what they need, and this may require them to have a difficult conversation.
I do think that this was a crappy way for Docker to get money without adding more value (they’re not giving anything new for the money, and most folks are just now learning this wasn’t the open source edition they had installed), but I agree it’s not that big of a deal.
The rate limiting thing was a much bigger issue, but Amazon helped everyone out with public registries.
While I agree that systemic misogyny and systemic racism (and the surrounding intersectionalities) in our field is massive and in need of attention, this is a huge shift in how one of the most commonly used tools. It’s like if you now had to pay royalties for your tool box if the construction site is large enough. It is worthy of critique and rebuke, it’s just not as big a deal as some have made it out to be.
We can handle multiple issues at a time (just like on production support!)
That’s fair, however the people I’ve seen complaining about this change the most don’t come across as the people that need this kind of assistance. Highly anecdotal and scoped to my own field of view, admittedly.
My interpretation here is that the reactions to this change you and I have each observed have very different intensities. I’m talking about people I respect (not even just the usual suspects on HN) virtually frothing at the mouth over the change, which is why I made the comparison to more serious issues.
But that’s also the reason I asked here instead of asking those people about it directly. Based on their clearly passionate reactions, I couldn’t expect a dispassionate explanation.