Podman & Docker

[eroussy]

Keep only podman on SEAPATH ?
Or podman and docker ?

[insatomcat]

Regarding the question of whether SEAPATH should keep both Podman and Docker, or focus on a single container runtime, my recommendation is to standardize on Podman.

Podman has effectively become the new industry standard, particularly in enterprise and infrastructure-focused environments. It is fully compatible with Docker images and workflows, which minimizes the impact on users while providing a more modern and secure runtime model.

From an operational standpoint, Podman is already our default choice through Ceph and cephadm, which are core components of our stack. Aligning SEAPATH with this existing tooling reduces complexity and avoids unnecessary divergence.

In addition, we want to remain open to a RedHat–based ecosystem. In that context, Podman is clearly the preferred and often the only supported container runtime. Choosing Podman now positions SEAPATH better for future integrations and long-term support.

Supporting both Podman and Docker would significantly increase maintenance and testing effort. That additional work needs to be clearly justified, and it requires contributors willing to actively support it over time. As a maintainer, my focus will be on Podman. Adding Docker support would impact all maintainers and should only be considered if there is a strong, concrete reason to do so.

At this stage, I do not see a compelling technical or operational argument in favor of continuing Docker support.

[eroussy]

I 100% agree with you technically

I'm just afraid that some less-technical users only knows about docker and want to use docker.
But Mathieu seems to agree with you, that the docker to podman transition is seamless