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

runtime: Document state annotations as a copy of config annotations #946

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Commits on Jan 11, 2018

  1. runtime: Document state annotations as a copy of config annotations

    The spec was not very clear on how state annotations are related to
    config annotations.  In the pull-request that landed state
    annotations, it sounds like these were supposed to be copied opaquely
    from the config [1].  It's still not clear to me why we'd copy
    annotations but not the rest of the config [2], but I'm leaving that
    alone for now.
    
    There was previous interest in runtime-specified annotations [3,4]
    (e.g. a RunV socket path [5]), but this commit does not allow runtimes
    to inject additional entries because I don't like:
    
    * Relying on config authors to avoid squatting on the namespace used
      by the runtime (if ties are broken in favor of the config) or
    * Silently clobbering configured annotations (if ties are broken in
      favor of the runtime).
    
    My preference would be to follow [3] and:
    
    * Only include runtime-specified information in the state annotations.
    * Require state readers to follow 'bundle' to the config.json if they
      wanted configured annotations (or embed the whole config.json in the
      state).
    
    But with 1.0 released and spec-maintainer comments like [1], I think
    it's too late to return to that approach.  If we want to expose
    runtime-specified annotations, I think we'll need a new state
    property.  There has been previous discussion of using "labels" and
    "annotations" to carry both types of information in the state [6], and
    while it's not as elegant as a full config copy, the
    labels/annotations approach is still viable.
    
    [1]: opencontainers#484 (comment)
    [2]: opencontainers#484 (comment)
    [3]: opencontainers#188
    [4]: opencontainers#331 (comment)
    [5]: opencontainers#188 (comment)
    [6]: opencontainers#331 (comment)
    
    Signed-off-by: W. Trevor King <wking@tremily.us>
    wking committed Jan 11, 2018
    Configuration menu
    Copy the full SHA
    76217dc View commit details
    Browse the repository at this point in the history