Container Support

Thanks for writing this up! I have just two comments:

• For the sake of completeness, we should specify what happens on blob removal. Proposal: without "force" it works analogously to the other artifact types, i.e. removal is not possible if any manifest refers to it. "force" is not supported for blobs(?) (I think this operation does not make much sense)

• For the regular case (not forced): If the removal of an artifact is not possible because there are references to the artifact, what information about these references do we give back to the caller? (no information at all, single reference that caused the error, all references that point to the artifact. I have no idea about the overhead created by these options)

Question

When we remove tag with force flag do we want to recursively remove content units on lower levels?

I think we don't. This functionality looks unrelated to "force". For all other artifact type "force" says "delete on higher levels as well". If there is a need for recursive delete for tags, I tend to introduce another flag for it.

gmbnomis wrote:

Thanks for writing this up! I have just two comments:

• For the sake of completeness, we should specify what happens on blob removal. Proposal: without "force" it works analogously to the other artifact types, i.e. removal is not possible if any manifest refers to it. "force" is not supported for blobs(?) (I think this operation does not make much sense)

Force flag will not be applicable for blobs. In general the plan is to disallow removal of blobs, unless they are orphans.

• For the regular case (not forced): If the removal of an artifact is not possible because there are references to the artifact, what information about these references do we give back to the caller? (no information at all, single reference that caused the error, all references that point to the artifact. I have no idea about the overhead created by these options)

Probably just the message that it is referenced in other manifests lists or that it has tags, therefore regular removal is not possible. Will it be useful to the user to see the list of digests the artifact is referenced in?

We can keep this in mind, and see that's the overhead whenever we get to the implementation.

Question

When we remove tag with force flag do we want to recursively remove content units on lower levels?

I think we don't. This functionality looks unrelated to "force". For all other artifact type "force" says "delete on higher levels as well". If there is a need for recursive delete for tags, I tend to introduce another flag for it.

ipanova@redhat.com wrote:

gmbnomis wrote:

• For the regular case (not forced): If the removal of an artifact is not possible because there are references to the artifact, what information about these references do we give back to the caller? (no information at all, single reference that caused the error, all references that point to the artifact. I have no idea about the overhead created by these options)

Probably just the message that it is referenced in other manifests lists or that it has tags, therefore regular removal is not possible. Will it be useful to the user to see the list of digests the artifact is referenced in?

I was thinking about returning the _href to the artifacts, not the digests. For example, I think this could help the user to make an informed decision whether repeating the removal with "force" is a sensible thing to do.

I agree, that makes sense to me.