Jon Polom

> Sure, we both can imagine case where that might be desired. Is it usually? Do users think carefully enough about that? I sure hope so! The URI requires specification...

@mtrmac Do you intend to make any of the changes discussed here to this PR? Does a separate issue need to be filed? Are you looking for outside contributions to...

> Prioritization of my time to implement new features is primarily decided by my employer. This is probably what I was mostly getting at. Not on your (immediate) horizon? If...

> **Option 1** > `1.3.6.1.4.1.57264.1.8` AND `1.3.6.1.4.1.57264.1.9` How is this any different than just supporting the URI SAN? The definition in the Fulcio source for OID `1.3.6.1.4.1.57264.1.9` and the URI...

> Yes, I completely agree. The direction I want to take things is to move towards supporting arbitrary front ends (dnf —installroot etc) and just doing a commit here. There,...

Might be wise to put some of the more general points there in the README. Unfortunately release 100 did not exist when I created this issue.

Yeah I think my point was to perhaps consider this as more of a prominent feature. Obviously it could be included somehow today but the focus seems on it being...

> Having higher level installers wrap/integrate with `bootc install` was very much a big design goal from the start. I think we have the essentials of that now with `bootc...

> > I am certainly not suggesting bootc needs an IPC abstraction beyond what you get from stdin/stdout. If bootc isn't a long lived daemon process I'm really unclear what...

There was mention earlier of an IPC which could be ideal for your use case. bootc should also provide some high level functions that can be called from a user...