Repository navigation
Dormant Docker Working Group #1818
Description
The README > Dependent projects lists
https://github.com/nodejs/docker-node — administration delegated to the Docker Working Group
which is described in
https://github.com/nodejs/docker-node/blob/main/GOVERNANCE.md with its members listed in
https://github.com/nodejs/docker-node/blob/main/README.md#governance-and-current-members as
- Hans Kristian Flaatten (starefossen)
- Hugues Malphettes (hmalphettes)
John Mitchell (jlmitch5)Edit: moved to Emeritus status
I had previously raised the issue nodejs/docker-node#2278 about the outdated https://github.com/nodejs/docker-node/blob/main/GOVERNANCE.md document that received an acknowledgement from @Starefossen back in Sep 2025, without any further action being taken.
Is there any possibility for the TSC to review and possibly revive the Docker Working Group?
Activity
mcollina commentedon Jan 27, 2026
We are already on it.
MikeMcC399 commentedon Jan 27, 2026
@mcollina
I'm very glad to hear that!
I've also logged nodejs/docker-node#2363 due to recent delays in publishing Docker images because of
musldelays and that seems like a topic for an active Docker Working Group to own, or at least get actively involved in.MikeMcC399 commentedon Jan 29, 2026
I believe it would be helpful also if the TSC or their delegate Docker Working Group enabled a decision to be made on nodejs/docker-node#2264 involving the bundling of the unsupported Yarn v1 Classic package manager in Node.js Docker images.
I've proposed leaving Yarn v1 in current Node.js Docker images and stopping distribution in Node.js >=26 Docker images.
The Yarn team already reduced their involvement in v1 to the absolute minimum in 2020 when Yarn 2 was announced. They've just announced a preview for Yarn 6, based on another technology leap, so their statement that Yarn v1 is frozen and bugs will only be fixed in later versions needs to be taken seriously.
sxa commentedon Jan 30, 2026
@MikeMcC399 Given the absence of any objections so far and a good amount of support in the issue I'd be tempted to suggest submitting a PR for the removal of yarn from the v26 images and beyond onwards at this point.
MikeMcC399 commentedon Jan 30, 2026
@sxa
I'm happy to hear that sounds good to you! Probably a PR for this would be best coming from an existing maintainer who is familiar with the whole build process.
sxa commentedon Feb 3, 2026
@mcollina With the TSC meeting likely to be skipped this week (Ref) is there likely to be any update here in the next week or so or will it need to wait until the next one? I can't add the agenda label to this issue myself to make sure it gets covered.
jlmitch5 commentedon Feb 3, 2026
nodejs/docker-node#2372 <- I have added a PR to remove myself from this working group. I haven't been involved since 2015. Apologies for not cleaning this up earlier.
MikeMcC399 commentedon Feb 4, 2026
The last GitHub contributions for https://github.com/hmalphettes for anything at all were back in the year 2024.
MikeMcC399 commentedon Feb 4, 2026
nodejs/docker-node#2368 would need concrete feedback from the Docker Working Group and this assumes that there is actually a working Working Group that can respond.
mcollina commentedon Feb 7, 2026
This is moving anyway, unfortunately there is a private discussion happening - we will summarize it later/as soon as things settle.
We have not forgotten about this and its a top priority.
mcollina commentedon Feb 20, 2026
Based on our discussions and the current state of the Docker WG, I propose we revoke the Docker WG's charter and form a Docker Team instead. Decision-making would be handled by the newly formed Docker Team, and until then by the Node.js TSC.
You can find the new governance documentation at nodejs/docker-node#2383.
@nodejs/tsc any objections?
jasnell commentedon Feb 20, 2026
Agreed
anonrig commentedon Feb 20, 2026
Agreed
MikeMcC399 commentedon Feb 21, 2026
I would tend to want to close this issue now, and continue any discussion in PR nodejs/docker-node#2383 which proposes to establish a replacement for the defunct Docker Working Group.
If for any reason the PR is rejected without a replacement I would reopen this issue.
MikeMcC399 commentedon Mar 3, 2026
@mcollina
I didn't appreciate that closing this issue would take it off the TSC agenda. Please re-open if you think this should be discussed tomorrow (I can't re-open it myself, because it was ultimately closed by you.)
Both the following are pending decisions:
Edit: both the above topics are on the agenda for March 4, 2026 #1825, so this comment can now be ignored.