Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Add RFC for Stack metadata #78
Add RFC for Stack metadata #78
Changes from 1 commit
0122f57
9c25aee
8468dd8
58c1c57
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Could we add a generic metadata field that is defined by the stack author?
E.g.,
io.buildpacks.stack.metadata
could be defined by another out-of-spec RFC when the stack ID is io.buildpacks.stacks.bionic.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yeah that makes sense. I think that we should keep the other labels I proposed since we already use this pattern for the
stack.id
andstack.mixins
and add this generic metadata label. How does that sound?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Agreed on this. I quite like the pattern of top-level keys being wholly reserved for the spec (i.e.
io.buildpacks.stack.*
) and having a key that is wholly reserved for users that the spec will never use (io.buildpacks.stack.metadata
). Top-level keys as they are described here look good.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@sclevine can you elaborate on what you hope to have in there?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
While I agree in theory, we currently use a lot of
io.buildpacks.*.metadata
for our own purposes, rather than reserving them for users. (e.gio.buildpacks.{lifecycle,build,builder}.metadata
)There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@ekcasey Well that's a kick in the shorts. We can pick another key (
.user
) that represents the same thing, but alas is a naming inconsistency. My priority stack is as follows:Even if that means we have some exceptions (e.g.
io.buildpacks{lifecycle,build,builder}.metadata
), I don't think we should introduce new inconsistencies.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@kvedurmu I don't think this one has been addressed yet.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@nebhale oops just updated it.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
How would rebase work with this RFC?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I believe the
io.buildpacks.stack.*
labels would need to be updated on the app image.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
That sounds good to me. Can get how this works into the RFC itself?