HackerReposA FIELD GUIDE TO OPEN SOURCE
ProSponsor the shelf♧ 0
← Back to top all-time
moby
swarmkit
Go2014–2025
moby / swarmkit

swarmkit

A toolkit for orchestrating distributed systems at any scale. It includes primitives for node discovery, raft-based consensus, task scheduling and more.

19Distinct people
24Mentions
0Explicit recommenders
3.7KGitHub stars
REPOSITORY AT A GLANCE

What to know before exploring

What it is

A toolkit for orchestrating distributed systems at any scale. It includes primitives for node discovery, raft-based consensus, task scheduling and more.

GitHub

Where it is used

No documented product use was verified in the last source check.

What people are saying

No recommendation phrase was found in the indexed comments.

No classified warning is attached to this page. Read the discussions before treating silence as approval.

Also in these discussions

Mentioned in the same Hacker News threads. That is not proof they are substitutes.

This week on Hacker News

Nov 8–Nov 15 UTC · Direct repository links and separately labeled related project stories. Indexed through 11/15/2026, 10:02:05 AM UTC.

No direct repository links were found in the indexed HN discussions over the past seven days. Older discussions are available below.

Mentions over time

HN mentions by year24 dated mentions

Observed mentions: 2014-06-10 16:38:46 UTC to 2025-06-17 14:24:45 UTC.

0123452014-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2015-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 2 mentions; 1 submissions, 1 comments20142015-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2016-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2016-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 5 mentions; 1 submissions, 4 comments2017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 3 mentions; 0 submissions, 3 comments2018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 5 mentions; 0 submissions, 5 comments2019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments20192020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 4 mentions; 0 submissions, 4 comments2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 comments2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 2 mentions; 0 submissions, 2 comments2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 comments2025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 comments2025

Counts come from the repository’s dated source evidence. Index cutoff: 2026-11-02 08:16:59 UTC.

View mention counts and date ranges
UTC ranges include their start and exclude their end. Select a period to filter the source evidence.
PeriodStart (UTC)End (exclusive, UTC)MentionsSubmissionsComments
20142014-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2015-01-01 00:00:00 UTC211
20152015-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2016-01-01 00:00:00 UTC000
20162016-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC514
20172017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC303
20182018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC505
20192019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC000
20202020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC404
20212021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC101
20222022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC000
20232023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC202
20242024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC101
20252025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2026-01-01 00:00:00 UTC101

What Hacker News says

5 sources
Docker founder here. > What is the motivation and benefit for running containers without docker? I regularly hear from people who want to run containers without Docker. There are several motivations, all of which are perfectly valid: 1. Learning. It's fun to build things from scratch to understand how they work under the hood. 2. Bad experience. Early versions of Docker were quite buggy, and we initially struggled to keep up with the colossal growth in usage and feature requests. As a result, many of the people who tried Docker in production too early were badly disappointed. Some of them decided Docker wasn't for them, and started looking for alternatives. 3. Extremely custom use case. If your deployment is larger, or more complex, or more specialized than 99.99% of deployments out there, then "mainstream" platforms like Docker might not
Read the rest
be the right fit for you. Of course we try to make Docker as customizable as possible, to support more a wider spectrum of use cases with plugins. But realistically, no single platform can cover all use cases, and I don't think any platform ever will. Docker is no exception. 4. Philosophy disagreement. Different people have different opinions on how applications should be developed and deployed. Docker tries very hard to be agnostic - to accommodate as many opinions as possible. But we can't please everybody. If Docker does not fit your philosophy of development and deployment, then the natural response is to look for an alternative. 5. Competition. Many Docker competitors started out as extensions or modifications of Docker, and over time are looking to reduce their dependency on Docker. I'm probably missing other reasons, but these are the ones I've been most exposed to. These are all reasonable reasons to not want to use Docker. Our approach is that, if you want to run containers without Docker, we should make it as easy as possible. In practice that means spinning out as many of the underlying components as possible (what we call the "plumbing") so that you can assemble it yourself without being stuck using the entire Docker platform. For example: - containerd [https://github.com/docker/containerd] is our low-level container runtime. - runc [https://runc.io] is a standardized "container executor", which we donated to the Linux Foundation as the reference foundation for the OCI spec. - libnetwork [https://github.com/docker/libnetwork] is the low-level networking implementation (including overlay networking which is a very useful primitive for container clustering) - swarmkit [https://github.com/docker/swarmkit] is a clustering/orchestration implementation - notary [https://github.com/docker/notary] is a cryptographic content verification tool, which you can use to sign and verify container images. - infrakit [https://github.com/docker/infrakit] automates the provisioning of infrastructure capable of running containers. Our opinion is that, even if you don't use Docker, by using these components for your own purposes, you are indirectly contributing to making Docker better. Splitting out these components has also forced us to refactor Docker into a more modular, more robust design. We even send Docker employees to explain how to run containers without Docker :) For example here's a talk we gave at Linuxcon: https://linuxconcontainerconeurope2016.sched.org/event/7oHM/...
In Running containers without Docker
It's the latter. As we build up the Docker platform we're spinning out small individual components (the "plumbing") which other products can use and contribute back to. Here are a few of the components we have open-sourced recently: * https://github.com/docker/swarmkit * https://github.com/docker/hyperkit * https://github.com/docker/vpnkit * https://github.com/docker/datakit * https://github.com/docker/containerd * https://github.com/docker/notary * https://github.com/opencontainers/runc * https://github.com/docker/libnetwork * https://github.com/docker/libcompose
In SwarmKit by Docker: a toolkit to orchestrate distributed systems at any scale

MAKE YOURSELF AT HOME

A few shortcuts

/
Search the collection
?
Open this guide
Esc
Close dialogs and navigation

Your saved repositories and interests stay in this browser.