Talk:OS-level virtualization

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the OS-level virtualization article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the subject of the article.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 12 months

Computing: Software C‑class Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks. C This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Software (assessed as High-importance).

Containers disambiguation

This page needs to be added to the disambiguation page for containers

Add information about Kata Containers

Kata Containers has just released version 1.0. The technology is basically qemu but with all hardware virtualization removed. Intel has been working on it for a couple of ears and it was highly talked about at the big OpenStack meetup in Canada in May 2018. https://katacontainers.io/ --Svintoo 2018-05-29 09:14 (UTC)

Definition of container

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

While researching for this article, I've noticed different definitions of container depending on what aspects of the technology the authors want to stress. For example, Docker defines a container as "a standard unit of software that packages up code and all its dependencies so the application runs quickly and reliably from one computing environment to another" [1], while this article (before I rewrote the lead) defined a container as an instance of a virtual userspace created thru OS-level virtualization [2]. Since Docker is the most widespread container framework, the lead should give due weight to their definition (which stresses portability). Qzekrom 💬 ^they_them 18:24, 3 March 2019 (UTC)Reply

Renaming back to “OS-level virtualisation”

Latest comment: 3 years ago4 comments3 people in discussion

I've renamed this back to OS-level virtualisation (shortening "Operating-system-level" to "OS-level" for a shorter title). Container is very Linux-specific terminology (possibly borrowing on the branding of an implementation in Solaris); I've never heard of anyone referring to FreeBSD jail or DragonFly BSD's vkernel as a container; undo an ill-discussed and Linux-specific move of something that's a very well-known operating system paradigm as-is; "container" is probably also a slang, and doesn't describe all levels of "OS-level virtualisation", either; in fact, in the prior discussion itself one of the suggestions was to rename the page either to "containers" or to "jails", which shows a very clear lack of consensus of how this should be called if a rename is to be performed, and confirms that the prior name of "OS-level virtualisation" might as well be more neutral and encyclopaedic. Do not move again unless a clear and sourced consensus is apparent. There needs to be an article about "OS-level virtualisation" for other technologies to reference, which don't use "container" terminology and aren't known as "containers", and where people would be confused by the mentions of "containers". If you think a separate article about containers is warranted, feel free to create such article, but I fail to see clear evidence supporting a rename. MureninC (talk) 02:32, 9 April 2019 (UTC)Reply

@MureninC: I think there was a clear consensus to move to "Container (virtualization)"; while one user did suggest "jail" as an alternative target, I did implicitly address that by saying that "container" seems to be the most popular name... by far. If you disagree with the move decision, please use Wikipedia:Move review to contest it instead of reverting unilaterally. Qzekrom 💬 ^they_them 05:47, 9 April 2019 (UTC)Reply

Dekimasu closed the move, so talk to him before starting a formal move review per the directions at WP:MR. Qzekrom 💬 ^they_them 05:50, 9 April 2019 (UTC)Reply

@MureninC: This name directly conflicts with the definition of virtualization and creates a harmful misconception about what is being talked about. Virtualization implies that there's a resource that is being virtualized. In case of containerization - there isn't one. There is no virtual machine, no hypervisor, no virtual resource. It's just OS separating processes on a level of particular system APIs, such that each containerized process group gets its own data from these APIs, with no mix. Historically different techniques were used to achieve this (jails), but the containerization is the current state of the art, and as such it is the accepted nomenclature. Where it's been implemented first and whether people confuse the concept with older techniques should have no bearing on that nomenclature.

Judging by the previous comments, this rename was unilateral, and counter to the policy at Wikipedia:Article titles, which states: "The title may simply be the name (or a name) of the subject of the article, or, if the article topic has no name, it may be a description of the topic. Because no two articles can have the same title,[3] it is sometimes necessary to add distinguishing information, often in the form of a description in parentheses after the name. Generally, article titles are based on what the subject is called in reliable sources.". Almost all of the cited sources refer to this technique as "software containers", whereas "OS-level virtualization" is only used in two of them.

MrMizo (talk) 18:12, 24 October 2021 (UTC)Reply