Rename `oci-image-tool create` to `oci-image-tool create-bundle`

[coolljt0725]

oci-image-tool create is confusing, rename it to create-bundle, and we may have create-layer in future which is infligh in https://github.com/opencontainers/image-tools/pull/8 and we may have create-image in future.

Signed-off-by: Lei Jitang [email protected]

[wking]

On Thu, Sep 07, 2017 at 08:27:01AM +0000, Lei Jitang wrote:

oci-image-tool create is confusing, rename it to create-bundle, and we may have create-layer in future which infligh in #8.

opencontainers/image-spec#467 is still open and opencontainers/image-spec#554 was rejected, but I still prefer ‘unpack’ for this sort of thing 1. That focuses the name on the image-spec object (the manifest and blobs) that are being unpacked, instead of on the runtime-spec object (the bundle) that is being created. To distinguish from other unpacking (e.g. unpacking a single layer, or a stack of layers, just a config, etc.), I'd recommend ‘unpack manifest’ (or if you prefer, ‘unpack-manifest’). Unpacking a single layer would be ‘unpack layer’, unpacking multiple layers would be ‘unpack layers’ and unpacking an image-spec config into a runtime-spec config would be ‘unpack config’ or ‘translate config’.

[jonboulle]

I tend to agree with https://github.com/opencontainers/image-tools/pull/182#issuecomment-328409898 - unpack nomenclature seems a lot more intuitive here (especially considering this is a superset of the unpack command)

[coolljt0725]

@jonboulle @wking we already has a oci-image-tool unpack which only unpack the layers to a rootfs, so do you mean to use oci-image-tool unpack to create runtime bundle and use oci-image-tool unpack-layers to unpack the layers to a rootfs?

[wking]

On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 01:17:08AM +0000, Lei Jitang wrote:

… we already has a oci-image-tool unpack which only unpack the layers to a rootfs, so do you mean to use oci-image-tool unpack to create runtime bundle and use oci-image-tool unpack-layers to unpack the layers to a rootfs?

I'd rather avoid an unqualified ‘unpack’. I don't mind about hyphenated or unhyphenated versions, but here's the unhyphenated forms of what I'm thinking (based on my earlier suggestions in 1):

• ‘unpack layers’ unpacks a stack of layers (as referenced by a manifest). Currently this is ‘unpack’.

• ‘unpack layer’ unpacks a single layer (possibly into an existing, populated directory). We don't have a command for this at the moment.

• ‘translate config’ (or ‘unpack config’) for converting a configuration from the image-spec form to the runtime-spec form (and possibly vice versa via --from and --to options) and writing the result to stdout.

• ‘unpack manifest’ combining ‘unpack layers’ and ‘translate config’ with the config written to config.json. Currently this is ‘create’.