(Disclaimer; I wrote the blog post a little while ago, and my thoughts on this have changed a little bit - surprised to see it pop up here...)
I think the confusion here is two-fold; sure, I think many don't really grasp what the point of the project is in its entirety, but I also think the aim of the project is a bit confused.
The comment I made that you're referring to was specifically about the runtime: that's the bit of the paragraph at the start you chopped out. Yes, the runtime could change in the future, but the comment was about the existing runtime.
The 'container standard' thing I think is potentially interesting, but actually, I don't think it buys much. As a set of tools, it is substantially weaker than the existing system development/spinning tools. And sure, getting rid of overlays might be possible - but then, what's the point? If you're going to flatten out trees, you may as well build the image properly in the first place.
I think the confusion here is two-fold; sure, I think many don't really grasp what the point of the project is in its entirety, but I also think the aim of the project is a bit confused.
The comment I made that you're referring to was specifically about the runtime: that's the bit of the paragraph at the start you chopped out. Yes, the runtime could change in the future, but the comment was about the existing runtime.
The 'container standard' thing I think is potentially interesting, but actually, I don't think it buys much. As a set of tools, it is substantially weaker than the existing system development/spinning tools. And sure, getting rid of overlays might be possible - but then, what's the point? If you're going to flatten out trees, you may as well build the image properly in the first place.