types.BlobInfo is basically a Descriptor about image HOT 5 CLOSED

The philosophical question is to what extent this is a generic concept and to what extent it is an implementation detail of a specific transport mechanism which should not be strongly coupled to the generic interface.

See the URLs discussion in #147, is that a plausibly generic field? When we are not using the field, are we “really” using the Descriptor?

Does moving to a Descriptor make anything easier in the code?

(This is not a “no”, and using third-party code instead of maintaining it ourselves is generally attractive. It’s just not entirely clear to me what the fit is like.)

from image.

When we are not using the field, are we “really” using the Descriptor?

My bad, #147 does actually add it.

from image.

@runcom @mtrmac @vrothberg What is the state of this issue. It is two years old, can we close it?

from image.

I'll take a shot and close it. Replacing BlobInfo with something else seems like a scary rabbit hole to me.

from image.

Yeah, BlobInfo is a part of the internal API of GetBlob/PutBlob, which have been surprisingly in flux recently. Tying that to a vendor-neutral format specification would not make anything better.

from image.