One small clarification up front, since this tends to get misread:
Cohesix isn’t trying to be a better Linux, a lighter Kubernetes, or a new ML runtime. It’s intentionally not a workload OS.
The problem it’s aimed at is the authority boundary: where control, policy, leases, and revocation live once you already have large, fast-moving OSS stacks on the host. That’s why the VM is aggressively constrained (no_std, no POSIX, no daemons) and why everything reduces to file-shaped operations with explicit budgets and failure modes.
Most of the “use X instead” answers assume you want more power inside the boundary. This goes the other way: remove power there so the remaining behavior is auditable and explainable.
If that tradeoff doesn’t resonate, it’s probably the wrong tool—and that’s OK.
One small clarification up front, since this tends to get misread:
Cohesix isn’t trying to be a better Linux, a lighter Kubernetes, or a new ML runtime. It’s intentionally not a workload OS.
The problem it’s aimed at is the authority boundary: where control, policy, leases, and revocation live once you already have large, fast-moving OSS stacks on the host. That’s why the VM is aggressively constrained (no_std, no POSIX, no daemons) and why everything reduces to file-shaped operations with explicit budgets and failure modes.
Most of the “use X instead” answers assume you want more power inside the boundary. This goes the other way: remove power there so the remaining behavior is auditable and explainable.
If that tradeoff doesn’t resonate, it’s probably the wrong tool—and that’s OK.