There are some things Docker, Inc does that upset me, but I can't say this is one of them
Containers aren't really supposed to be precious. With live-restore enabled the daemon restarts should be transparent
I have a hard time thinking of a situation where I really cared about the runtime version
I prefer automatic updates, especially something like Docker that can be a security liability. Being in the docker group is essentially a path to privilege escalation
As a developer, wouldn't I want to know the effort I put into maintaining old versions was being compensated at its fair market value, so I know I'm working on something people care about?
Requiring people to update to the latest version as a condition of providing support is perfectly reasonable.
Giving something to me for free and then altering that free thing at a later time against my wishes is not reasonable IMHO.
Consider an e-book: would it be acceptable to give out free e-books, then change that e-book (remotely) at a later time? What if those changes remove value? Or, what if they introduce content that you find highly objectionable?
Now, imagine a future where every (digital) thing is like that.
Docker can do whatever it pleases in accordance with its licensing, but we don't have to like it.
Containers aren't really supposed to be precious. With live-restore enabled the daemon restarts should be transparent
I have a hard time thinking of a situation where I really cared about the runtime version
I prefer automatic updates, especially something like Docker that can be a security liability. Being in the docker group is essentially a path to privilege escalation
It also gives the new stuff more road testing