It's absolutely stunning that people actually defend this behaviour!
The community is having an outrage - and rightfully so - about a silently discontinued artifact delivery at a very critical time.
Which is their opinion and every human being is entitled to have their own opinion and state it openly.
It is also perfectly fine to expect a standardised behaviour to continue.
However, what is most important is that is perfectly fine to shame an open source product for pulling features and money grabbing people after years of gathering community and locking them in.
I don't think the people in this thread have any concept of how much $$$ it costs to distribute a free container that is going to be downloaded billions of times.
You are a farmer, not a big fancy profitable one. Your tractor is from 1970 and works great, when it works. Your wife has health problems and can't really help out around the farm much - kids have gone off - so you just do things mostly by yourself. With your lucky dog Skip by your side. Even though times are tough and money ain't coming in like it used to - you still give free produce to the local schools and shelters. You've been doing it for over 20 years, and the community loves you for it.
But then your wife passes. Medical bills are too high. You can't give away free produce to the local schools anymore.
The community is outraged. They come to your farm with pitchforks. They set your barn and fields on fire.
> I don't think the people in this thread have any concept of how much $$$ it costs to distribute a free container that is going to be downloaded billions of times.
Not very much at all. It looks like they're hosting on Docker Hub which doesn't charge for bandwidth. I could create a pro account for $11/month and be able to serve an image billions of times. The compute to build an image is small enough that it can be done at whim on a dev machine.
But when you plug in the numbers: that the farmer raised $126 million, and hosting unlimited Docker Hub pulls costs $11/month, it doesn't quite feel the same.
It's more like the farmer was giving leftovers for free to schools and it was so good that it made him famous. People from all over the country came in, including businessmen who told the farmer he is missing out and should be charging more for his food.
He started a restaurant chain but, the businessmen went further and said that a quality product cannot be given away for free and made him stop supporting schools and shelters which got him rich and famous in the first place. Even tho, he was just handing over leftovers (it cost around USD 100 to host a docker image - yearly)
Think EA, Microsoft and Xbox, Broadcom and bitnami.
I don't understand the point. The entire raison d'être of this project is that you self-host it and don't pay money for S3 and control your supply chain.
If you are denied this possibility — it is much easier just to use S3.
OVH sells bare metal servers with 6 cores 32 gb ram and 512 nvme disks in raid 1 (!) with *unmetered* 1gbps line, for 70 bucks. 70 united states dollars.
How much of AWS EC2 you can get out for 70 bucks?
Now, this OVH still makes money on it. They make money, despite these servers require actual human being to put them into datacenter, plug network, power, etc.
You are literally getting the OG RAW POWER and a slice of a datacenter for 70 bucks and they still make money.
How much amazon makes on every single silly vm that they charge for compute, storage, network, ip, network again, oh and credits, cpu credits, startup credits, whatever credits, oh an api calls ;]
That's true, but these usually come with LB and a bit of redundancy.
Granted, it's not crucial at the very initial stage, but it also gives the easy of deploy.
My take is that not much devs are capable of standing up their infra, even clicking it up in aws, thus services like heroku or fly.io exists and do well I presume.
Load balancers and redundancy are tech-creep, IMHO. At least in the initial stages. But I think people in tech, and in general, underestimate how performant modern hardware is. They run their service of 1/2 vCPU which was carved from some modern Intel Xeon / AMD Epyc, and they are afraid that their little startup will eat all the CPU.
You can achieve redundancy by spinning two docker instances of the same container and setting Caddy reverse proxy in front of them. You don't need k8s for that.
100% agree! I much appreciate your input. It validates my theory how things should be done - IMHO. I'm just genuinely curious how people around the world, with different backgrounds, deploy their stuff :)
Thanks for your input! This seems super cool! Have you considered heroku and alike?
Or you just stick to DO for the additional remote compute that you use?
I like that my VPS is just a generic Linux box, and not a PaaS. If DigitalOcean doesn't work, I can redeploy anywhere else in a few minutes.
I also find this a lot easier to reason about than a bunch of scattered services talking to each other through APIs. In the end, it's just docker plus a bunch of scripts.
