-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 35
Introduce new oldgeneric os_purpose. Stabilize 0102-v2.
#1172
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
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Changes from all commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| @@ -1,7 +1,7 @@ | ||||
| --- | ||||
| title: SCS Image Metadata | ||||
| type: Standard | ||||
| status: Draft | ||||
| status: Stable | ||||
| track: IaaS | ||||
| description: | | ||||
| This is version 2 of the SCS-0102 Image Metadata Standard. | ||||
|
|
@@ -60,6 +60,7 @@ require an additional field: | |||
| | `os_purpose` value | Intention | | ||||
| |--------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------| | ||||
| | `generic` | A general purpose image, (mostly) vanilla from upstream | | ||||
| | `oldgeneric` | A general purpose image, replaced by a newer one | | ||||
| | `minimal` | A much more barebones general purpose image | | ||||
| | `k8snode` | Node image built for k8s with CRI and kubelet | | ||||
| | `gpu` | Image with GPU drivers e.g. for HPC or AI | | ||||
|
|
@@ -70,8 +71,8 @@ require an additional field: | |||
| of doubt. Talk to the SCS standardization bodies if you'd like to see this list extended which is | ||||
| likely the case if you fall back to `custom`. | ||||
|
|
||||
| The usage of standardized `os_distro`, `os_version`, `architecture`, and `os_purpose` help cloud users to create | ||||
| automation that works across clouds without requiring image names to be standardized. | ||||
| The usage of standardized `os_distro`, `os_version`, `architecture`, and `os_purpose` helps cloud users | ||||
| to create automation that works across clouds without requiring image names to be standardized. | ||||
|
|
||||
| _Uniqueness requirement_: For every assignment of values for `os_distro`, `os_version`, | ||||
| and `architecture`, there MUST be at most one public (`visibility=public`), | ||||
|
|
@@ -110,7 +111,9 @@ level). | |||
| Technically, the thus updated image is a new image and will thus carry a new UUID. | ||||
| It is recommended that the old image gets renamed (e.g. build date or patch level attached) | ||||
| and hidden (`os_hidden=True`), but remains accessible via its (unchanged) UUID for some | ||||
| time. | ||||
| time. If an old image with `os_purpose` setting of `generic` is kept that way, we recommend | ||||
| to change `os_purpose` to `oldgeneric`. If it is not hidden, this is mandatory to meet | ||||
| the uniqueness requirement. | ||||
|
|
||||
| The update handling by the provider is described via the properties `replace_frequency`, | ||||
| `uuid_validity`, `provided_until`, and `hotfix_hours`. | ||||
|
|
@@ -271,4 +274,5 @@ A boolean property that is not present is considered to be `false`. | |||
| - Reference OpenStack image spec for standard values of `os_distro`, `architecture` and `hypervisor_type`. | ||||
| - Recommendation on `os_version` to be a version number (if such a value exists). | ||||
| - Recommended field `os_purpose`. | ||||
| - Version 2.0 (this one) makes the field `os_purpose` mandatory. | ||||
| - Version 2.0 makes the field `os_purpose` mandatory. | ||||
| - Version 2.1 added an `os_purpose` of `oldgeneric`. | ||||
|
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Suggested change
Related to comment above.
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. We shouldn't omit the change though. It should be included in line 277.
Member
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Agree with @mbuechse
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. You are right. I'll create an additional suggestion. |
||||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.