-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4.7k
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 the concept of "group" or "virtual" repositories #10053
Comments
@titou10titou10 this has been discussed several times internally and like you said it depends on a) proxy and b)better resource management so it acts as a fast network switch, all the while hiding all of this from the end user so no reconfiguration is needed. If you are interested in being more involved in this discussion, ping me xalex@vmware.com |
This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions. |
please track progress here: #8082 I'm closing this to keep issues from blowing up. @titou10titou10 |
Are there any news? Is this feature already implemented? |
This is implemented already. But you only have a one to one match between local and remote. |
Is there any way to get the same result you can achieve with Nexus groups? |
I would also like Harbor to support this feature. |
Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
Harbor is used as our private docker repository
We want to only allow users to access one repository, where all images will be scanned for security before being deployed (We use OpenShift and Kubernetes)
For this, Artifactory and Nexus have the concept of "virtual + remote" repository (Artifactory) or "group + proxy" repositories (Nexus)
Those repositories are a logical grouping of many local or remote repositories. In our case it would be:
One local repo may be selected as the target of push requests when done on the virtual repo
When a pull is done on this kind of repository, harbor has to try to fetch the image from the first repo, then the second etc and store it locally if coming from a remote repo
When a push is performed, the image is stored in the repository selected as the "push" repo
Currently Harbor does not implement the notion of "vitrual" nor "remote" repositories
The main benefit is that we can enforce that all the images are pulled only from harbor, and so we are sure that all the images used by anyone is scanned by clair in harbor before being deployed
Additional context
Obviously , Harbor has to implement the notion of "remote" or "proxy" repository for this to work before implementing the notion of "virtual" or "group" repo
Usefull links:
Artifactory virtual repositories
Artifactory remote repositories
Nexus group repositories
Nexus proxy repositories
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: