Skip to content
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

README: clean-up and clarifications #367

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Oct 5, 2016

Conversation

jonboulle
Copy link
Contributor

  • Remove redundant sentence describing media types document
  • Disambiguate "OCI Layers", and more directly explain link to archival
    format
  • Change ROADMAP pointer to a more realistic date
  • Minor tweaks to FAQ wording

Signed-off-by: Jonathan Boulle jonathanboulle@gmail.com

- Remove redundant sentence describing media types document
- Disambiguate "OCI Layers", and more directly explain link to archival
  format
- Change ROADMAP pointer to a more realistic date
- Minor tweaks to FAQ wording

Signed-off-by: Jonathan Boulle <jonathanboulle@gmail.com>
* A process of hashing the image format for integrity and content-addressing (base layer)
* Signatures that are based on signing image content address (optional layer)
* Naming that is federated based on DNS and can be delegated (optional layer)
* An archival format for container images, consisting of an [image manifest](manifest.md), an [image layout](image-layout.md), a set of [filesystem layers](layer.md), and [image configuration](config.md) (base OCI layer)
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Add a reference to manifest-list.md following #365?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Eh, this sentence is already unwieldy - I'd rather let manifest.md be the canonical one and there are links to the manifest list from there

@wking
Copy link
Contributor

wking commented Oct 4, 2016

One nit that I don't feel strongly about 1, otherwise 4341c08
looks good to me.

@vbatts
Copy link
Member

vbatts commented Oct 5, 2016

LGTM

Approved with PullApprove

1 similar comment
@philips
Copy link
Contributor

philips commented Oct 5, 2016

LGTM

Approved with PullApprove

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.

4 participants