<p>If you try to go to <a href="https://github.com/docker/docker">https://github.com/docker/docker</a> it redirects to <a href="https://github.com/moby/moby">https://github.com/moby/moby</a>. </p>
<p>Did they rename such a popular repo just like that? But why? Is docker going down or bankrupt or purchased by another company? And what about the import paths? </p>
<p>I have many questions and few answers.</p>
<hr/>**评论：**<br/><br/>HornedKavu: <pre><p><a href="https://blog.docker.com/2017/04/introducing-the-moby-project/">https://blog.docker.com/2017/04/introducing-the-moby-project/</a></p></pre>thesnowmancometh: <pre><p>Import paths are fucked.</p>
<p><a href="https://github.com/moby/moby/pull/32691">This PR</a> was the explanation I heard.
In my opinion, by making more of their source code community-owned, Docker Inc. is freeing up their resources so that they don't have to maintain the source any longer. With less to maintain, they can focus on their enterprise technologies.</p>
<p>That's just my take on the situation. I could be very wrong.</p></pre>weberc2: <pre><blockquote>
<p>Import paths are fucked.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Are they? The PR you linked to explains that the Go tooling should handle the redirect transparently. I dislike the move, but I don't think it's cause for panic.</p></pre>mightyroger: <pre><p>The docker subreddit have all answers you need, but it's basically a stupid publicity move</p></pre>garoththorp: <pre><p>What happened is a good idea: restructure the docker project to accommodate all the R&D that has happened.</p>
<p>But then they named it Moby. Yeah like the super famous musician who has songs in a dozen movies. Did they forget to Google?</p>
<p>I get it. Moby Dick. They have a whale logo. But you know that the story is about killing the whale right?</p>
<p>Better, their reference implementation is called "Moby Origin" which is perhaps the least original name you can make. Not only does it sound like one of Moby's albums, but also like maybe a sequel to a video game?</p>
<p>So I'm salty about the stupidity of taking a well recognized, well branded project -- that kinda explains what it does in the name -- and instead calling it Moby. But otherwise seems to be good business as normal.</p></pre>The_Jare: <pre><blockquote>
<p>But you know that the story is about killing the whale right?</p>
</blockquote>
<p>SPOILER ALERT Despite the determination of his pursuers, Moby wins.</p></pre>: <pre><p>[deleted]</p></pre>jonjohnn: <pre><blockquote>
<p>Not stupidity, calculated. I'm not even sure how it is legal to be honest</p>
</blockquote>
<p>One has to trademark one's product in specific trademark categories( and countries). Obviously, a giant like "Coca Cola" (or Disney) has made sure nobody can name his container software that way. But the musician might not have done so. </p></pre>: <pre><p>[deleted]</p></pre>Sphax: <pre><p>what migration? the docker ce version is still there, you won't have to do anything </p></pre>Hatnice: <pre><p>"moby" has mentions of docker all over it. Very strange...</p></pre>
