Hacker News Reader

Comment by remram | Hacker News Reader

I would really welcome more experimentation in the cluster process management space. Right now it's Kubernetes, Nomad, or solutions embedded into applications (e.g. cephadm).

It's a shame that this is an exact copy in a different language.

Kubernetes is nice but I can't wait to see what the next generation of tools will look like.

View on HN

I really wish Flynn[1] had taken hold before Kubernetes became so popular. Deploying and managing apps was a hell of a lot less complex, and very Heroku-like.

Sadly, it's no longer being developed as of 3-4y ago.

[1]: https://github.com/flynn/flynn

I was thinking about making something that could compete with kubernetes, but I also wanted to use this project to learn more about the inner workings of kubernetes since I personally learn best when I create (or recreate) something.

Maybe in the future I will create something that could be a competitor.

Not to be audacious, but I’m working on a post and will HN Show it, soon.

It’s called “lattice”, and it’s a software architecture with similar intentions as Kubernetes, but a vanilla approach that leans into existing frameworks instead of inventing things from scratch

Cool, I'd love to see it when it comes out!

There's also docker swarm.

Discontinued

"Do not confuse Docker Swarm mode with Docker Classic Swarm which is no longer actively developed."

https://docs.docker.com/engine/swarm/

Docker Swarm mode has been in maintenance mode for at least 5 years now. It's way to late to bet the house on a product that exists pretty much to support people that have bet on it, not to completely pull the rug under their feet.

I introduced Docker Swarm at work in 2018 and already there were rumours that since Kubernetes had won it was just a matter of time until Docker Swarm was fully abandoned.

What's strange is Docker Compose is very slowly resurging. I almost feel like that with a few more primitves (e.g. nodes with tags) and you'd have a much simpler Kubernetes. Which a lot of people might like.

isn't the whole idea of docker compose that it's supposed to be single machine, though?

How likely do you think the introduction of a nodes primitive is given this?

I can see it if it were a strict opt in addition but it feels like it also fundamentally expands the scope of what the tool is.

I agree it would, and I think it's unlikely, but I also think there's a gap between Docker Compose and Kubernetes, and while I know the implementation gap is large, the configuration syntax gap is small. If someone could extend the Compose syntax to include some sort of way to declare what node tags it should/shouldn't run on, and how many, it might be really interesting as a good power for config complexity tradeoff.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com