5 comments

[ 3.9 ms ] story [ 155 ms ] thread
That's an interesting way to provide a free tier. I think starting a new product this way could go over well.
Please developers, don't let this become a thing.
As a developer, wouldn't I want to know the effort I put into maintaining old versions was being compensated at its fair market value, so I know I'm working on something people care about?
Requiring people to update to the latest version as a condition of providing support is perfectly reasonable.

Giving something to me for free and then altering that free thing at a later time against my wishes is not reasonable IMHO.

Consider an e-book: would it be acceptable to give out free e-books, then change that e-book (remotely) at a later time? What if those changes remove value? Or, what if they introduce content that you find highly objectionable?

Now, imagine a future where every (digital) thing is like that.

Docker can do whatever it pleases in accordance with its licensing, but we don't have to like it.

There are some things Docker, Inc does that upset me, but I can't say this is one of them

Containers aren't really supposed to be precious. With live-restore enabled the daemon restarts should be transparent

I have a hard time thinking of a situation where I really cared about the runtime version

I prefer automatic updates, especially something like Docker that can be a security liability. Being in the docker group is essentially a path to privilege escalation

It also gives the new stuff more road testing