Hello, Even though I am a newbie in this community and just trying to get familiar with OMV environment, using OMV 5, I would like to share my two cents relevant to use of docker with this community.
I have learned that after posting several questions to the forum, many plugins will not be available in OMV-5. One of the responses stated that
You're far better off embracing docker at this point, since that is going to be where almost everything is going. Once you get the hang of it, it is incredibly simple.
I understand importance of Docker, benefits. But the way that docker is being planned in OMV-5, I suspect that is beneficial for the future of OMV.
My response to the above
Honestly, even if docker will be used, it should fit into the system conventions. For example, I am advised to use a container in place of webdav plugin in a new thread, because webdav will not be supported in OMV5. I installed it, now I have fiddle with new users, permissions etc. in docker environment. I have to make docker volumes attach to the shares and many other tids and bits.
This corrupts whole nas idea. About, more than ten years ago, I was managing my personal linux servers with samba, nfs, ftp etc. I was tired of these, managing users, shares, permissions in different environments and applications and bought a nas. NAS is supposed to facilitate and enhance. Spinning docker containers from all sources is not solution to the problem.
If I am to manage docker containers for even basic NAS services, I can just get rid of OMV, make every service docker container and just run my bare linux server with docker containers. Why will I be needing OMV or any other NAS solution.
I want to use docker to run applications of my interest. However many services are dependent on OMV settings, configuration such as users, shares etc. If OMV will quit plugin architecture, and move to docker, I believe Docker containers must be build as a way that it will integrate with OMV. Users should not be forced to hassle with configuration of containers to bridge with OMV
If OMV is being left to provide a couple of basic services, and all others are left to docker containers from any sources, then surely in a very short amount of time, OMV itself will be obsolete since it will be bringing very little to the table.
Whole NAS idea was to minimize these management activities and provide network storage, later people wanted to utilize NAS devices with applications, which I also want. But this should not hamper the fundamental NAS idea and ease of use.
My proposal is simply if plugins will be container, OMV should provide containers that fit the infrastructer seamlessly and with little or no effort. OMV may itself be a docker container or can be run as a stack (I do not know if this is possible in terms of managing hardware). But in anycase OMV should provide eco-system of containers that fit into the OMV environment seamlessly if docker will be substitute of OMV plugins.
I may want to run none OMV certified/released container than I have to do the chores by myself. Other than that, these plugin substitute containers must be build by the plugin developers for the best use of OMV.
Current approach seems beneficial to developers NOT to the end users. I am, as an end user, here for ease of use, sparing time from these chores not to add new ones.
These are my personal options, I hope I would not offend anybody.