Probably because they did such a good job with Vagrant that they realized they were running out of things to do and decided, in the interests of job security, to ride the train a little longer by "pivoting."

Then again, who am I to complain? Vagrant is a superb tool and the endless and pointless reinventing of standards every few years keeps like 70% of us employed.

This addresses a bigger picture that some folks have been (ab)using vagrant to accomplish and requesting features that belonged in a new project, rather than on top of vagrant.

Such as?

Such as provisioning and deployment I guess... I've seen those requests over and over.

Which is why this uses Vagrant and doesn't replace it.

> So I feel like the reason I like Vagrant is because it does it's one job well, then gets out of my way. Doesn't sound like this shares that philosophy.

Seems to me it might, if you view its "one job" as coordinating a bunch of lower level tools that each do their own "one job".

Well, and assuming it does it well.