-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 426
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
Clarify and correct OCI Artifact Type for SIF #4437
Comments
@ikaneshiro Are you looking into this? |
I think so - he was pinged on one of the issues, and @jmstover mentioned in Slack he would chat with him about him. Thanks to all for being so responsive! OCI is pretty important. |
I'm probably not super useful here as I lack the context somewhat, but let me know if there's any way I can assist. |
@jscook2345 yes, sorry about the latency needed to read through a couple things related to OCI naming conventions. So as mentioned above, there are clear problems with the current sif layer
Since this is part of the artifacts component of OCI I'm planning on following this guidence as it is part of an open pr within the opencontainers/artifacts repo. It seems best to change the
I do not see a need to have a Open to any suggestions! @SteveLasker Will a change to this |
What is the |
.sif was the original plan, but that is raising some questions. This is why we want/need more feedback on the artifact Prs. |
@jmstover Not referring to SIF version strictly, but there may be a point in the future where we want to change exactly what we are storing in this blob, so I think it's prudent to include a version piece. |
I like the example of versioning the persistence, even though the sif version may not change. |
Reading through all of this @ikaneshiro and looking at https://github.com/SteveLasker/artifacts/blob/registry-operators-how-to/authoring-artifacts.md#defining-the-artifact-type maybe we want...
Would love to get this set properly for 3.7.0 - I'll open a PR for comment ASAP so we don't lose track of it. |
Thanks David, |
I think I might be off now...from looking at the ^ according to that one the +xxx bit is So we'd be instead @ikaneshiro - I'm going to update the PR #5658 for this - sorry! |
@dctrud Ah, good catch! |
Hey folks! I want to pass forward some important discussion that needs your attention - on the OCI board there is a somewhat incorrect representation of the content type string for Singularity (SIF), specifically it has a spelling mistake and the incorrect format (tar). The original discussion is here: opencontainers/image-spec#791 (comment) and I think it would be really important for someone that official represents Singularity (at Sylabs) to step in and offer opinion / wisdom. Thanks!
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: