Systemd is a modular system, and it's also possible to not install different components if you want. Most of the components aren't strictly necessary.
I think your community is begging you to continue to support alternatives. You just aren't listening.
When you ship batteries, people depend on the batteries and that means you can't really swap them when you want to because things stop fitting. It doesn't help that all of this is baked by default into a single monolithically versioned binary with an API whose documentation isn't nearly rigorous or stable enough to promote alternative implementations.
I like Docker or I wouldn't be here commenting, but you know what would make me love Docker? If every piece was pipeable CLI command.
Like...
docker-listen tcp://,... | docker-run --image-tar=blah --container-tar=blah | docker-monitor --log-file=blah | docker-swarm --orchestrator-socket=orch.sock | docker-link --port=some.other.machine:port
[1] http://git-scm.com/book/en/v2/Git-Internals-Plumbing-and-Por...
A good question we have to ask is how do we get from where we are, to the desired end state that you describe? There's nothing stopping it from happening, it's a fork away with a good chance of upstream contribution.
Today that's through proposals and discussions in freely available on github, irc, and mailing lists for the docker project and which we call fire hose of information symbolically.
Maybe we're missing an additional avenue for input and creativity. What do you think?
Come say hi on irc if you want to talk some more. We (the 200-ish people from all horizons on #docker-dev) don't bite.
Happy hacking everyone.
I think it boils down to the tension between HN as a place for uninvolved commenters to discuss articles, and as a place for the subjects of those articles to engage in that discussion. Not to slight your intentions, but a comment like "I will work it out right here with you." comes across as an attempt to wrest control of the conversational dynamic, not to mention a little confrontational. For better or for worse, that's something that doesn't really fly when you have an obvious vested interest.
This is not meant as criticism, just food for thought that might help explain the frosty reception you've been getting around here.
I think this is the kind of thing that might be at issue: https://github.com/docker/docker/issues/6791 [1] (I realize that the ticket is not closed, I just bring it up as an example of something that I see as counter to commoditization and thus counter to my goals as a user.)
One of the issues that I personally have with docker (much as I love it) is that it also wants to be a process supervision "framework" (for lack of a better word). I don't want that, I want a reliable way to supervise a docker-started process from whatever supervisor daemon that I want (whether that be systemd, runit, or whatever). This is not really for ideological reasons -- I want something that integrates properly into my distribution of choice, not something that wants to be a system unto itself.
[1] ... I'm obviously not the submitter of this issue. I just stumbled upon it during a related search.