Skip to content

Comments

Clarify that canonical JSON is not a requirement#1249

Merged
sudo-bmitch merged 1 commit intoopencontainers:mainfrom
sudo-bmitch:pr-json
Mar 13, 2025
Merged

Clarify that canonical JSON is not a requirement#1249
sudo-bmitch merged 1 commit intoopencontainers:mainfrom
sudo-bmitch:pr-json

Conversation

@sudo-bmitch
Copy link
Contributor

@sudo-bmitch sudo-bmitch commented Feb 28, 2025

Fixes #1226.

RFC 8785 sent me over to RFC 7493 which I think we really want and everyone should already be doing. I moved the canonical reference to point to RFC 8785 and downgrade it from a SHOULD to a MAY to better reflect the current state of implementations. The phrase "The order of entries in JSON objects is not significant." I copied from the runtime spec.

tianon
tianon previously approved these changes Mar 1, 2025
Copy link
Member

@tianon tianon left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I can live with this 😂

Signed-off-by: Brandon Mitchell <git@bmitch.net>
@sudo-bmitch sudo-bmitch merged commit c05acf7 into opencontainers:main Mar 13, 2025
4 checks passed
@sudo-bmitch sudo-bmitch deleted the pr-json branch March 13, 2025 17:57
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Canonical JSON

3 participants