←back to thread

The Deletion of Docker.io/Bitnami

(community.broadcom.com)
329 points zdkaster | 3 comments | | HN request time: 0.916s | source
Show context
asmor ◴[] No.45049447[source]
> However, in order to sustain and support the dedicated team of engineers who maintain and build new charts and images, a subscription will be required if an organization needs the images and charts built and hosted in an OCI registry for them.

This is such a naive take. Bitnami images were a sign of goodwill, a foot in the door at places were the hardened images were actually needed. They just couldn't compete with the better options on the market. This isn't a way to fix it, it's extortion. This is the same thing Terraform Cloud did, and I don't think that product is doing so hot.

> Essentially, Bitnami has been the Jenkins of the internet for many years, but this has become unsustainable.

It's other people's software, so it's very rich of Bitnami to accuse anyone of freeloading when their only contribution is adding config options to software that maybe corresponds to a level 2 on the OperatorFramework capability scale[1] - usually more of a 1.

[1]: https://operatorframework.io/operator-capabilities/

replies(11): >>45050005 #>>45050042 #>>45050416 #>>45050488 #>>45050688 #>>45050800 #>>45051410 #>>45052041 #>>45053279 #>>45054090 #>>45055791 #
1. j45 ◴[] No.45050042[source]
Maybe the community can repackage it since Bitnami is only packaging.
replies(1): >>45050539 #
2. tedk-42 ◴[] No.45050539[source]
Naive take.

That's like saying, "Honda isn't a car company, they're an assembly company because they don't mine the minerals to make the parts and rely instead on supply chains"

replies(1): >>45050729 #
3. dig1 ◴[] No.45050729[source]
Well, Bitnami didn't produce own hardware stack either ;) Joke aside, it's not naive - CentOS, Alma, Rocky, Ubuntu... FOSS community has some experience with these things