> The command line interface is really badly designed. It’s ugly, hard to learn, difficult to remember, illogical, inconsistent, and just makes no sense to me at all.
I wonder if the author could elaborate here.
I wonder if the author could elaborate here.
While I agree that developers should support and have documentation for hosting without Docker, I think the arguments in the article are very poor.
It's completely fine to dislike a technology - hell if I don't! - but here it seems like they are arguing against Docker just for the sake of it.
It's kinda badly described and unintuitive. The amount of people who were surprised by the firewall rules messing up their existing firewall setup is very high. And it also just grabs a subnet and you have to dig why it would use that one and not another. Not sure about conflicts. But it's a bit of "it works until it doesn't".
I didn't have many "wtf just happened?" moments with docker, but 100% of them were network-related and half of them were hard to troubleshoot.
`cmd containers` does nothing, `cmd images` does `cmd image ls`,
`cmd rm` does `cmd container rm`, `cmd ls` does nothing, its of course `cmd ps`,
`cmd rmi`, no `cmd lsi`,
no easy way to extract the resultant hash from a `cmd build`, can use a tag I suppose
Maybe I'm in the minority, but I've never used those commands... I'd rather write `docker container ls` than an obscure short-hand alias.
Granted, The linux subsystem stuff has expanded it's scope, but there's a few folks I know that have never touched linux and are using docker to run stuff.