Hacker News Reader

Comment by cpitman | Hacker News Reader

Many of the responses here are talking about how to vendor/cache images instead of depending on an online registry, but remember that you also need access to a supply chain for these images. Base images will continue to be patched/updated, and you need those to keep your own images up to date. Unless the suggestion is to build all images, from the bottom up, from scratch.

View on HN

It's a stop-gap measure. There are dozens of companies chomping at the bit to replace Docker as THE docker registry: I'd bet someone at Github is very busy at this very moment.

The article talked about using the Github Container Registry, which was launched in 2020.

Those very busy people at Github may well be in marketing

> Base images will continue to be patched/updated, and you need those to keep your own images up to date. Unless the suggestion is to build all images, from the bottom up, from scratch.

If docker pushes people to that, hopefully more reproducible solutions like nix and it's ux friendly "porcelains" such as https://devenv.sh/ gain market share.

Typically when you "cache" something, you're gonna expire it at some point...no? If the image is patched, it eventually gets refreshed in the mirror. If the image dissapears at least we still have it until we figure out where the heck it went.

>Unless the suggestion is to build all images, from the bottom up, from scratch.

this doesn't really seem like an unreasonable suggestion.

just change your build process to pull from the source repository (almost always linked from the docker hub page) instead and eliminate one level of dependency from the chain. in an ideal world, docker hub would have been a more stable buffer inbetween the original source of the image and you, but as long as they are proving to be more of a liability than a source of stability, just cut them out.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com