I'd agree that if it seems that containerization is a fundamental part of an OS that it would make sense to have a neutral platform for it.
That said there were containerization efforts in this area in the past (e.g. LXC) which never really seemed to attract the same kind of traction as Docker.
Ultimtely if people want to create containers, it's entirely possible to do with pure linux commands and no upper-level software at all, it's just Docker makes it much easier/nicer to achieve :)
> Ultimately, if people wanted to create [text files], it's entirely possible to do with pure linux commands with no upper level software at all, it's just [Sublime Text] makes it much easier/nicer to achieve.
It's absolutely possible (see: Bocker), but not a very productive way to go about things. It's much more productive to take an existing technology and make it better than to start from scratch (yet again), especially with permissive licenses like those used in Docker Engine.
possibly although unless they got a decent number of the original developers across in a fork (Which seems somewhat unlikely) it would be a pretty difficult thing to pull off to maintain/develop the codebase.
Not sure I can think of a case where a fork has been successful without a decent percentage of the original developers supporting it.
That said there were containerization efforts in this area in the past (e.g. LXC) which never really seemed to attract the same kind of traction as Docker.
Ultimtely if people want to create containers, it's entirely possible to do with pure linux commands and no upper-level software at all, it's just Docker makes it much easier/nicer to achieve :)