Skip to content

Conversation

@AkihiroSuda
Copy link
Member

The index.json is OPTIONAL, according to the description in
image-index.md and media-types.dot.

Signed-off-by: Akihiro Suda [email protected]

discussed in #716

The index.json is OPTIONAL, according to the description in
image-index.md and media-types.dot.

Signed-off-by: Akihiro Suda <[email protected]>
@jonboulle
Copy link
Contributor

index support within a layout is required, otherwise a layout doesn't make much sense.
I agree it's a little awkward. This is consistent with the image index being optional in media-types.dot

Maybe you could add a line here saying that index support is necessary for implementations working with layouts. Or we just strike that line. the provider/consumer distinction is unclear.

@wking
Copy link
Contributor

wking commented Aug 2, 2017

More previous discussion here. Note that even though index.json is currently required, you don't have to list any references inside it.

@stevvooe
Copy link
Contributor

stevvooe commented Aug 2, 2017

What does this achieve? While refs are one function of the index, without an index, it is fairly unsafe to be inferring types. Is there something that cannot be with a required index?

@stevvooe
Copy link
Contributor

stevvooe commented Aug 2, 2017

I think I misread this initially.

The current wording is correct. index.json is required.

Remember that layouts are not the primary transport of OCI by any means, so make sure to interpret the statements under the assumption that there is a blob access model. To be clear, https://github.com/opencontainers/image-spec/blame/master/image-index.md#L4 says that images don't have to be packed into indexes, but they should be able to support consumption of indexes.

Moving for close here.

@philips
Copy link
Contributor

philips commented Aug 2, 2017

I think I agree this is something to close.

@stevvooe
Copy link
Contributor

stevvooe commented Aug 2, 2017

@AkihiroSuda I'm going to go ahead and close this.

If there is something I've missed here, please reach out!

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.

5 participants