Exactly, my point being that even though it's not easy to update things at runtime, I don't want Docker to stop us from trying to achieve that goal and keep innovating. On Apr 8, 2015 11:35 AM, "Frank Lyaruu" <fr...@dexels.com> wrote:
> I agree, I do feel that vibe from time to time, mostly due to the > 'containers should be immutable' mantra. > > In my opinion, if you can get away with it, make it as dynamic as you > want, but I guess we all know that building an application that can be > reconfigured + updated on the fly is not easy at all. > > Anyway, while we're at it, I also wrote a few posts about OSGi + Docker, > with quite a different approach: I explore monitoring the Docker API to > discover services, and inject those services as OSGi configuration data: > > http://www.codemonkey.nl/discovery/ > > I think OSGi and Docker can complement each other very nicely. > > regards, Frank > > On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 4:54 PM, Ryan Moquin <fragility...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Don't get me wrong, I don't mean that Docker and Karaf are >> interchangeable. I mean that it feels like, from quite a few things I >> read, that the trend may be to have a docker image built as part of every >> CI build. The purpose being that deployments should be fully immutable and >> if changes need to be made, then a new Docker image should be generated and >> deployed. >> >> One particular conversation that I felt really expressed this type of >> development track is this one: >> >> https://groups.google.com/forum/m/#!topic/fabric8/iEmyW0_rnSk >> >> Fabric8 used to be fully built on Karaf but has changed the approach to >> support other runtimes. Nothing is wrong with that, but if that pattern >> becomes a trend, then it feels that many of the nice features of Karaf will >> become "discouraged" and I can't see them being furthered in Karaf at that >> point. >> >> I love Karaf and everything it offers. I'm just a little concerned about >> how Docker is being pushed and the mindset that seems to evolving around >> it. The point is, I'm hoping that because Docker is immutable, that it >> doesn't cause all software development to shoot to be immutable. >> >> Hopefully that makes sense. :) Lots of new technologies allow developers >> to know less about software development and to write sloppier code because >> they can get away with it. While building things faster and minimizing >> redundant or error prone tasks is great. I guess I'm a little concerned >> about how Docker can be misused and the effect it could have. >> >> Hopefully that makes sense :) I have no problem embracing Docker as a >> container to run Karaf in, I'm just hoping Docker doesn't become a >> liability or stifler to Karaf. >> >> These of course are only my opinion of the research I've been doing on >> and off. I may be completely off the mark or misinterpreting things. >> >> Ryan >> >> On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 10:04 AM, Vincent Zurczak < >> vincent.zurc...@linagora.com> wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> I don't know if we can really compare Karaf and Docker. >>> I use OSGi to build modular applications. My bundles are Java modules >>> that I can assemble in one way or another. And I use Karaf to create a >>> custom distribution of my OSGi applications. It is a developer thing. >>> >>> Now, I use Docker to execute applications in an isolated container on a >>> machine. >>> Even on VM, running Docker can simplify support and debug for >>> applications. The fact we can isolate things is very helpful for that. And >>> it is convenient to maximize the usage of VM resources. >>> >>> I do not see how one could replace the other. >>> BTW, I already run Karaf in Docker containers. And one of our OSGi >>> applications (which runs in Karaf) can create and interact with Docker >>> containers. So, you can make both of them together when you need. >>> >>> >>> Le 08/04/2015 14:31, Ryan Moquin a écrit : >>> >>> I kind of feel like the big push of Docker in the development community >>> in general (as a whole, not talking about the Karaf developer community), >>> will potentially cause a lack of innovation and improvements in the >>> deploying of applications. Docker could become a crutch. If an >>> application is slowly leaking memory over a 24 hour period, why fix it? >>> When it crashes, just replace it with a new instance. >>> >>> >>> May I say that cloud computing and virtualization in general already >>> setup this kind of approach? >>> When a VM or a container has a problem, it may indeed be more simple to >>> launch a new one, reconfigure your application to use it and kill the old >>> one. But this is not new at all. And there are some little things to deal >>> with, like reconfiguration. Docker works the same, at its level. And even >>> if you can create new containers, the less procedures you have in >>> production environments, the better it is. So, having applications with >>> 99,99% uptime will always be better. >>> >>> BTW, Docker also has some limitations (with systems services as an >>> example). >>> So, it comes with its own problems. And I do not expect embedded systems >>> to use Docker (at least, for the moment). >>> >>> To summer it up, I would say OSGi brings modularity to Java applications. >>> And that Docker brings modularity to deployments. That's not the same. >>> >>> My 2 cents, >>> >>> Vincent. >>> >>> -- >>> Vincent Zurczak >>> Linagora: www.linagora.com >>> >>> [image: Twitter] <https://twitter.com/VincentZurczak> [image: Vincent >>> Zurczak @ LinkedIn] >>> <http://fr.linkedin.com/pub/vincent-zurczak/18/b35/6a7> [image: My >>> Skype ID] <callto://vincent.zurczak> [image: My English blog] >>> <http://vzurczak.wordpress.com> >>> >> >> >
