mirror of
				https://github.com/moby/moby.git
				synced 2022-11-09 12:21:53 -05:00 
			
		
		
		
	
		
			
				
	
	
		
			118 lines
		
	
	
	
		
			6.1 KiB
		
	
	
	
		
			Markdown
		
	
	
	
	
	
			
		
		
	
	
			118 lines
		
	
	
	
		
			6.1 KiB
		
	
	
	
		
			Markdown
		
	
	
	
	
	
Docker Engine Roadmap
 | 
						|
=====================
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
### How should I use this document?
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
This document provides description of items that the project decided to prioritize. This should
 | 
						|
serve as a reference point for Docker contributors to understand where the project is going, and
 | 
						|
help determine if a contribution could be conflicting with some longer terms plans.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
The fact that a feature isn't listed here doesn't mean that a patch for it will automatically be
 | 
						|
refused (except for those mentioned as "frozen features" below)! We are always happy to receive
 | 
						|
patches for new cool features we haven't thought about, or didn't judge priority. Please however
 | 
						|
understand that such patches might take longer for us to review.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
### How can I help?
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Short term objectives are listed in the [wiki](https://github.com/docker/docker/wiki) and described
 | 
						|
in [Issues](https://github.com/docker/docker/issues?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aissue+label%3Aroadmap). Our
 | 
						|
goal is to split down the workload in such way that anybody can jump in and help. Please comment on
 | 
						|
issues if you want to take it to avoid duplicating effort! Similarly, if a maintainer is already
 | 
						|
assigned on an issue you'd like to participate in, pinging him on IRC or GitHub to offer your help is
 | 
						|
the best way to go.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
### How can I add something to the roadmap?
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
The roadmap process is new to the Docker Engine: we are only beginning to structure and document the
 | 
						|
project objectives. Our immediate goal is to be more transparent, and work with our community to
 | 
						|
focus our efforts on fewer prioritized topics.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
We hope to offer in the near future a process allowing anyone to propose a topic to the roadmap, but
 | 
						|
we are not quite there yet. For the time being, the BDFL remains the keeper of the roadmap, and we
 | 
						|
won't be accepting pull requests adding or removing items from this file.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
# 1. Features and refactoring
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
## 1.1 Runtime improvements
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
We recently introduced [`runC`](https://runc.io) as a standalone low-level tool for container
 | 
						|
execution. The initial goal was to integrate runC as a replacement in the Engine for the traditional
 | 
						|
default libcontainer `execdriver`, but the Engine internals were not ready for this.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
As runC continued evolving, and the OCI specification along with it, we created
 | 
						|
[`containerd`](https://containerd.tools/), a daemon to control and monitor multiple `runC`. This is
 | 
						|
the new target for Engine integration, as it can entirely replace the whole `execdriver`
 | 
						|
architecture, and container monitoring along with it.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Docker Engine will rely on a long-running `containerd` companion daemon for all container execution
 | 
						|
related operations. This could open the door in the future for Engine restarts without interrupting
 | 
						|
running containers.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
## 1.2 Plugins improvements
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Docker Engine 1.7.0 introduced plugin support, initially for the use cases of volumes and networks
 | 
						|
extensions. The plugin infrastructure was kept minimal as we were collecting use cases and real
 | 
						|
world feedback before optimizing for any particular workflow.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
In the future, we'd like plugins to become first class citizens, and encourage an ecosystem of
 | 
						|
plugins. This implies in particular making it trivially easy to distribute plugins as containers
 | 
						|
through any Registry instance, as well as solving the commonly heard pain points of plugins needing
 | 
						|
to be treated as somewhat special (being active at all time, started before any other user
 | 
						|
containers, and not as easily dismissed).
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
## 1.3 Internal decoupling
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
A lot of work has been done in trying to decouple the Docker Engine's internals. In particular, the
 | 
						|
API implementation has been refactored, and the Builder side of the daemon is now
 | 
						|
[fully independent](https://github.com/docker/docker/tree/master/builder) while still residing in
 | 
						|
the same repository.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
We are exploring ways to go further with that decoupling, capitalizing on the work introduced by the
 | 
						|
runtime renovation and plugins improvement efforts. Indeed, the combination of `containerd` support
 | 
						|
with the concept of "special" containers opens the door for bootstrapping more Engine internals
 | 
						|
using the same facilities.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
## 1.4 Cluster capable Engine
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
The community has been pushing for a more cluster capable Docker Engine, and a huge effort was spent
 | 
						|
adding features such as multihost networking, and node discovery down at the Engine level. Yet, the
 | 
						|
Engine is currently incapable of taking scheduling decisions alone, and continues relying on Swarm
 | 
						|
for that.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
We plan to complete this effort and make Engine fully cluster capable. Multiple instances of the
 | 
						|
Docker Engine being already capable of discovering each other and establish overlay networking for
 | 
						|
their container to communicate, the next step is for a given Engine to gain ability to dispatch work
 | 
						|
to another node in the cluster. This will be introduced in a backward compatible way, such that a
 | 
						|
`docker run` invocation on a particular node remains fully deterministic.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
# 2 Frozen features
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
## 2.1 Docker exec
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
We won't accept patches expanding the surface of `docker exec`, which we intend to keep as a
 | 
						|
*debugging* feature, as well as being strongly dependent on the Runtime ingredient effort.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
## 2.2 Remote Registry Operations
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
A large amount of work is ongoing in the area of image distribution and provenance. This includes
 | 
						|
moving to the V2 Registry API and heavily refactoring the code that powers these features. The
 | 
						|
desired result is more secure, reliable and easier to use image distribution.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Part of the problem with this part of the code base is the lack of a stable and flexible interface.
 | 
						|
If new features are added that access the registry without solidifying these interfaces, achieving
 | 
						|
feature parity will continue to be elusive. While we get a handle on this situation, we are imposing
 | 
						|
a moratorium on new code that accesses the Registry API in commands that don't already make remote
 | 
						|
calls.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Currently, only the following commands cause interaction with a remote registry:
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
  - push
 | 
						|
  - pull
 | 
						|
  - run
 | 
						|
  - build
 | 
						|
  - search
 | 
						|
  - login
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
In the interest of stabilizing the registry access model during this ongoing work, we are not
 | 
						|
accepting additions to other commands that will cause remote interaction with the Registry API. This
 | 
						|
moratorium will lift when the goals of the distribution project have been met.
 |