-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1
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
Question about OCI Index Template #15
Comments
Image-spec doesn't seem to have an analog to runtime-spec's extensibility section. But the presence of reserved properties suggests similar intentions. So I think adding a However, my plan is to get
Sure you can. It's unfortunate that the current image-spec Go types and image-tools functions don't provide for extention properties, but a workaround is to hold the Alternatively, you could skip image-tools and just reproduce the descriptor-matching locally in a way that preserves extention data.
I'd have preferred
So I think the best approach now is an extention property which we attempt to upstream.
Sure. When publishing, you canmake more people happy by pushing to more places. For example, maybe some consumers prefer Docker's CAS protocol, while others prefer OCI CAS-templates. Push to both, set them in |
One way to do this is to create an extended descriptor struct that also supports descriptor.Annotations["org.opencontainers.discover.casEngines"] = WhateverGosJSONSerializerIs(descriptor.CasEngines) And then unpack back into We could use an annotation like that in the spec instead of tje |
This is the way I went with in #23, with the hope being that |
Here 1 declare that server provides discovered OCI index object which entry should conform to
application/vnd.oci.image.manifest.v1+json
. However in examplecasEngines
entry 2 doesn't belong toOCI index 3. We can't parse the object according to current image-spec 4.
How about to change the
casEngine
definition toannotations
, to conform to OCI index strictly, like:There is a problem: according to
casEngines
, it should be array type, but my example allows only one pair ofprotocol
touri
. I think we can resolve this by extendingannotations
words to allow many pairs.IMO, I feel only one pair of
protocol
anduri
might be enough. Is there any possible of manyuri
s for oneprotocol
?The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: