-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 213
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
Add placeholder for content negotiation #218
Conversation
Signed-off-by: jdolitsky <[email protected]>
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.
LGTM
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.
LGTM
@justincormack what do you think about this? I would also like to drop this entirely in favor of manifest list based mechanisms, but I'm reluctant to do so until registries stop downconverting to schema 1. |
@jonjohnsonjr yeah thats fine. Note that the spec for Accept https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7231#section-5.3.2 says "If the header field is So it is always fine to serve something the client did not ask for, and |
Ooh this is nice. Will probably update GCR's behavior here to match. We might want to call out specifically some suggested behavior in the placeholder section around this? Right now we are returning a 404, which felt correct at the time, but is obviously non-conforming per the rfc. Just ignoring it would be wonderful, but I'm a bit concerned about breaking clients. |
Related to #212