People keep confusing "dockerfile" with the official library

[stuartpb]

See stuartpb/dokku-rethinkdb-plugin#7 (comment) - I've also gotten an email (on 2014-06-01, when the actual official library was just starting out) asking me why I wasn't using "the official dockerfile image" of RethinkDB because I was using crosbymichael/rethinkdb (which largely looks like what the official rethinkdb image would come to look like) instead of dockerfile/rethinkdb (which... doesn't).

I'm trying to be diplomatic here, but it seems to me that the existence of https://registry.hub.docker.com/repos/dockerfile/, using the Docker logo as its avatar, is problematic with the existence of an actual official library. If it was just called pilwon/, that would be fine, but the choice of name leads people to think dockerfile/ is the "official prefix" for "official Docker images", leading them to miss the actual official repos under /_/ altogether.

I imagine the same confusion would apply for base/ and dockerfiles/, were they publishing updates regularly.

[md5]

The use of Docker's logo by @dockerfile does seem problematic. That being said, the trademark & logo guidelines on Docker, Inc's site don't spell out what acceptable uses of their logo are as far as I could tell.

[md5]

Looks like this is being worked out: http://blog.docker.com/2015/03/updates-available-to-popular-repos-update-your-images/

[stuartpb]

Excellent, glad to see this being worked out!

Why do some of those links point to the library as https://registry.hub.docker.com/_ and some as https://registry.hub.docker.com/u/library ?

[yosifkit]

No reason that I know of. They go to the same place.

[alister]

I've got a PR for the dockerfile site to mark it as depreciated, and link back to that blog post for a better supported/official image.

[tianon]

This is resolved. 👍