Naming difference about container-images HOT 7 CLOSED

Our build teams needed additional clarity in the build artifacts. We are also no longer building the update releases. It's just going to be oraclelinux:7 and oraclelinux:8

from container-images.

Our docker image build pipelines depends on the naming of the file name, In the case of taking the latest build file earlier it have minor version number along with the filename now its having only Major version number which is giving hard time to check which file is what. If the build is going to be without minor version then we can change our pipelines to consider the folder names.

from container-images.

Why are you building from these images instead of using the official ones from Docker Hub or Oracle Container Registry? These tarballs are provided for convenience, but we didn't really expect folks to rebuild from scratch.

from container-images.

We have some customer rpm to apply to meet our security standard. so we are using the tar files, that also will eliminate a additional image layer if we use the docker tar files rather than pulling the images.

from container-images.

That's not a use-case we had considered. Moving forward, we may not maintain the folder strutcture either. It's likely to simplify down to just 7 and 8 with the latest tarball for each of the full and slim variants.

from container-images.

OK, that's fine. I can change the logic to have only 7 or slim, but do you have timeline or ETA when the folder structure changes to 7 or 8 simply ? Also do you published anywhere like release note or change log that the folder name changes?

from container-images.

I don't have an ETA because I don't know if it's been decided yet or not. I don't maintain a changelog of structural repo changes because again, this repo is intended for reference purposes only.

from container-images.