> it's extortion
That's a wild take for "somebody provided something for free but decided they don't want to anymore".
Sucks for you, looks like you have to do your job yourself now.
That's a wild take for "somebody provided something for free but decided they don't want to anymore".
Sucks for you, looks like you have to do your job yourself now.
In this bitnami case, I would have just built these images myself but they offered public images accessible from dockerhub. There's 0 reason to change the existing registry besides intentionally breaking builds. The security narrative they try to spin about why they will delete the legacy registry is also laughable. As if the consumers of those images are incapable of assessing the risk of using legacy images themselves.
I find that to be a pretty dishonest business model. I don't have any Bitnami images to replace, but I know a lot of people who do without ever having made that choice - and their bosses aren't going to pay Broadcom for the most part either. So you end up with overworked developers that now hate Broadcom and/or a whole lot of deployments that just break or never get updated. The number of people going "I can just switch over to the archive image, whatever" on the K8s subreddit alone is concerning.
You skipped the part where you bankrupt your competition in the space who can't afford to hemorrhage cash they don't have like a VC-backed startup can, hoover up all the customers, then charge more than the old guard industry did in the first damn place for a worse version of the same service, while also paradoxically paying any workers needed to provide said service even less than they were making before.
I think that's the point of above of "now you have to do your job" There's an evaluation that takes place when choosing to use something as an engineer, and the writing should have been on the wall the moment that Broadcom bought Bitrock to start planning to reduce dependency on those things.