-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 380
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
Allow referring images in oci: (and oci-archive: ?) by manifest digest #1828
Comments
Currently the
Proposal
|
Is there a currently a plan to include this in a further version? If nobody has time currently may I can implement the feature and open a pull request. Only thing that should be defined is the syntax for the digest. |
It’s tracked here as a reasonable RFE; I’m not aware of anyone actively working on it, and a PR would definitely be welcome. Yes, the syntax is the first thing which needs to be decided. Note that in the algorithm |
My idea was to use a regex to separate between the tag, index and digest form. Something like: tag: The above regex also consider the specific constrains for tag and digest. I'm not sure if the restrictions should be enforced here or if another processing step does this and we only have to distinguish between the different cases. |
@mtrmac what are your thoughts about using regex to separate between these cases? Is this the right way to go or do you have another suggestion? |
Using a regex matcher, or not, is an implementation choice, secondary to choosing the syntax. *shrug* The above proposes that |
Yes, that is correct What is the process to decide which syntax to use or should I just implement it and open a PR? @mtrmac If I implement this function would a regex solution be accepted or are there other ways to do it which are preferred/used in the library. |
Just open a PR, I think. No committee regularly meeting to present a proposal in triplicate to :) Intuitively I’m a bit skeptical that using a regex is ideal — regexes are fairly costly, and it seems harder to me to be certain that the decision is unambiguous and has been comprehensively tested (we require |
See containers/podman#17308 for the previous discussion.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: