Is it so that the fragmentation (the long list of distributions), or variety of configuration options, is a bad quality? This seems to be used as a counter argument to Kubernetes.
Probably, it could be end result of unconsistent design or bad technical choises. However, most likely it just means that there are multiple organizations and interest groups pushing changes and ideas to the project. This should be seen as a good thing. The downside is that there is no single source of best practices and this is confusing to newcomers. You just need to pick one distribution and trust the choises, or develop the competence and understanding.
And we could imagine that the userbase or the number of developers in single distribution (take OpenShift or Rancher) could be bigger that in Nomad itself.
Having said that, I still would like to see more stable Kubernetes landscape, and that has to happen eventually. The light distributions k3s and k0s are pushing things to nice direction.
OpenStack had similar, or maybe even worse, fragmentation and complexity issue when the hype was high. There were probably technically better alternatives (Eucalyptus?), but people (and companies) gathered around OpenStack and it won the round. However, comparing OpenStack to Kubernetes feels bad, as Kubernetes is technically far superior.
Probably, it could be end result of unconsistent design or bad technical choises. However, most likely it just means that there are multiple organizations and interest groups pushing changes and ideas to the project. This should be seen as a good thing. The downside is that there is no single source of best practices and this is confusing to newcomers. You just need to pick one distribution and trust the choises, or develop the competence and understanding.
And we could imagine that the userbase or the number of developers in single distribution (take OpenShift or Rancher) could be bigger that in Nomad itself.
Having said that, I still would like to see more stable Kubernetes landscape, and that has to happen eventually. The light distributions k3s and k0s are pushing things to nice direction.
OpenStack had similar, or maybe even worse, fragmentation and complexity issue when the hype was high. There were probably technically better alternatives (Eucalyptus?), but people (and companies) gathered around OpenStack and it won the round. However, comparing OpenStack to Kubernetes feels bad, as Kubernetes is technically far superior.