Add label to qualify production grade of image

[llunved]

Many products we want to put into images - as well as images as an entity themselves usually go through a pre-production lifecycle from experimental over beta, tech-preview, to production ready. Some are development-only or community editions vs fully supported. It would be helpful to have the ability to describe this in metadata.

[philips]

Semantic versions are very often used to relate this information. What is an example use case where a version number doesn't provide this info.

[goern]

semver shows the quality of a release, but not the context of it. there seems to be no common understanding that 0.4.0 to 0.8.0 is tech-preview and 1.0.0 upwards is always production ready. so labeling an images as 'experimental' would give some better hint than a plain (close to meaningless) 0.99.7A

[ghost]

Even more: most images created by Red Hat will follow the version of the primary component inside the image (e.g. a rhel7/php image would reflect the current version of php in RHEL). That does not properly indicate the production quality of the image as such.

[rhatdan]

What label would you want?

[ghost]

Docker uses 'environment' in their examples I think.