Talk:Docker (software)/Archive 1

Someone needs to update this article and also Docker,_Inc. with info about the Moby Project. Sources: ^{[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8]}   —  Hei Liebrecht 19:47, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

Hello Today, I reverted nine contributions by 177.237.150.206 because of very serious technical accuracy concerns. Because the reversion is massive, I thought I'd better start the discussion phase of the BRD process myself. What 177.237.150.206 did wrong includes:

• Adding a "Docker command" entry to the "Tools" section for the docker command-line app. This command, however, is not a tool; it is the Docker client, already covered in the "Components" section of the article.
• An unreferenced "Versions" section is added, asserting that Docker CC and Docker EE are different editions (not versions) of Docker. It is not so. To quote from the official source:

  Docker EE is a subscription of software, support and certification for [...]

• A word "swap" is added to the list of resources which includes "CPU, memory, block I/O, network". There is no such resource as "swap". There is, however, the swap file, which is not a resource, but file or partition on disk. (Docker documentations consider it part of the "memory" resource. That's correct too.)
• "Operating level container technology such as Docker are lighter than other virtualization technologies [...]". This is a grammatically faulty sentence that adds nothing new to what it replaced. Docker containers are lightweight; I agree. But not all OS-level containers are so. As the article already says, a Windows Server container is massive (~650 MB).

I think that's all.

Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 06:45, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

Hello again

I just reverted yet another attempt to reinstate bad conents without participating here or so much as writing an edit summary that explains what's different this time.

• In rev. 829213303, the "swap" mistake is reinstated, only this time in the lead. In addition to the previous problem, we are facing a WP:LEAD violation as well.
• In rev. 829213451, the "Versions" section is reinstated, this time with a source. The source is a release not that clearly has links to "Docker CE" and "Docker EE". But here is the catch: It has links to "Commercially Supported Docker Engine", "Docker for Mac", "Docker for Windows", "Docker for Azure", "Docker for AWS" and "Docker Machine" as well. So, verification for "two versions" still fails. Another thing is: The release note still does not say "these are different editions of Docker". A service can have release notes too.

Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 10:05, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

I'm a Windows dev and after reading this, the Docker site overview and several magazine articles I still cannot figure what it is and it does. All sources I have found so far have, as is the case here, one or two very broad sentences, followed by a dive into Linux terminology based details.

May I issue a plea for a paragraph for folks who have never seen this before? 80.246.32.33 (talk) 10:54, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

Agreed, your description is perfect. The article is still inpenetrable as of Aug 2018. Jess_Riedel (talk) 04:05, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

As others have commented, the language in this article is dense and unclear, despite (or because of?) recent edits. The first sentence is especially meaningless and sounds like spam. I've been a Linux-based developer and systems administrator for 20 years and this article doesn't say much to me other than "it's virtual machines, but somehow different."

I'd propose the entire "Integrations" section needs to go. It seems to counter Wikipedia's stated goals and could probably be replaced with a single sentence saying this software (sorry, this collection of interoperating software-as-a-service and platform-as-a-service offerings) integrates with many platforms. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Miken32 (talk • contribs) 00:45, 22 May 2019 (UTC)

On 22 April 2019, an edit by 212.178.216.46 replaced well-referenced explanation of Microsoft's relation to Docker with NPOV-violating text that merely explains what "Windows Server Containers" and "Hyper-V Isolation" are. The edit summary by 212.178.216.46 implies that they have a hard time believing that Microsoft's solutions do not perform containerization and Microsoft's use of the term "container" is just a marketing scheme.

Apart from the NPOV problem, 212.178.216.46 seems to have copied and pasted text directly from the Microsoft website. The copied text comes from the "Windows container types" section of the "Containers on Windows" article hosted at docs.microsoft.com/en-us/virtualization/windowscontainers/about/#windows-container-types. For details as to why this wrong, see WP:COPYPASTE.

5.219.77.186 (talk) 05:17, 13 May 2019 (UTC)

Reviewed - looks like it's a brief but real copy paste operation. It seems that you fixed it on the article, unidentified IP editor, and the fix appears on first glance appropriate. Thank you for calling it out here which helps explain and justify the article edit. Good job. Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 07:26, 13 May 2019 (UTC)

The user was actually right in substance, in spite of copyright violation. The claim that Windows Containers in Windows Server did not have anything with Docker makes no sense whatsoever.

Windows Containers are based on Docker. It's just the initial release for Windows Server 2016 only supported process isolation and only supported containers that use Windows Nano Server as the guest OS. Lightweight Hyper-V isolation of Windows Nano Server containers was added for Windows 10 version 1703 (and relevant Server 2016 update), then Docker also implemented Linux containers for Windows Server using Moby/LinuxKit with a custom Hyper-V virtual machine, and finally support for Linux containers on Windows with lightweight Hyper-V isolation was added in Windows 10 version 1803 (and relevant Server 2016 update).

I've copyedited the article to clarify the various isolation modes and the dates of their respective announcement. Dmitry _{(talk•contibs)} 18:26, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

Agreeing with what software developer says is okay. Stealing from them is not. flowing dreams (talk page) 12:24, 19 October 2019 (UTC)

Please do not revert edits that contain information about implementation details backed by references to official sources. Docker is not a Linux-only technology anymore, it supports Windows containers with Nano Server, and supports Linux containers on Windows. If you have verifyable third party sources that back your opinions on what is 'true' Docker, feel free to include them in relevant sections. Dmitry _{(talk•contibs)} 15:53, 19 October 2019 (UTC)

@DmitryKo: Hello. Do you see the message below? The one by Miken32 that says the article is still largely incomprehensible? That's your doing. Not only you are violating copyright, edit warring, and treating your fellow editor (yours truely) like a vandal (reversion without an edit summary), the end result is that you are making the article largely incomprehensible.

In addition, the burden of proof is on the person who adds contents. That's you. flowing dreams (talk page) 09:52, 20 October 2019 (UTC)

Maybe next time you added questionable contents to Wikipedia and your fellow editor contested it, politely ask: "Oh, hey! Can you tell me what exactly I did wrong?" flowing dreams (talk page) 13:02, 20 October 2019 (UTC)

I disagree with the proposed removal of the Windows section. It is not really a repository of links, as the User:Miken32 has already removed the links to services that use Docker containers. It's unfortunate that this section feels foreign to Linux users, but Windows is a different OS with proprietary kernel APIs and closed source code, and no user-space virtualisation as in the Linux Kernel, so the implementation details are different.

I'm not sure why you blame me for previous copyright violations or incomprehensive non-encyclopedic stataments in this section. I've made clarifications which are properly attributed with links to official statements and current product documentation. These are legitimate edits, and not vandalism or copyvio, so there are no grounds for reverting them outright. 21:38, 20 October 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by DmitryKo (talk • contribs) 22:11, 2019 October 20 (UTC)

So, your answer to everything is "I don't know". There was a time when people who edited articles knew stuff. flowing dreams (talk page) 04:47, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

As it currently stands, the Operation section leaves the impression that Docker runs on Linux only. The MacOS already states it runs a Linux virtual machine. What about Windows? The article badly needs a section explaining what Docker for Windows is and how it operates. Urhixidur (talk) 15:06, 28 November 2019 (UTC)

"Dockerfile" is not explained/introduced. --Mortense (talk) 16:50, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

This page is confused and confusing. It is titled "Docker (software)" but it contains large amounts of information about Docker Inc. the company that now writes that software. I'm sure that the page should have a "History" section that talks about the software's origin and 'owners', but the separation should be clear. Docker Inc. have their own page already so a lot of the text in this article could simply be removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Singularity Preparation (talk • contribs) 08:06, 9 March 2021 (UTC)