Skip to content
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

Documenting customizations and namespace contribution process #80

Open
bamurtaugh opened this issue Aug 10, 2022 · 2 comments
Open

Documenting customizations and namespace contribution process #80

bamurtaugh opened this issue Aug 10, 2022 · 2 comments
Assignees
Labels
documentation Improvements or additions to documentation

Comments

@bamurtaugh
Copy link
Member

We have some info about contributing a new namespace and properties for a tool here, but it's not very detailed.

  • When should a tool/org/company propose a new namespace?
  • What does the contribution process look like (i.e. different detailed steps for publicly vs privately contributed namespaces)?
@bamurtaugh bamurtaugh added the documentation Improvements or additions to documentation label Aug 10, 2022
@bamurtaugh bamurtaugh self-assigned this Aug 10, 2022
@avidal
Copy link

avidal commented May 25, 2023

Agreed. I think it makes sense to adjust the docs so that customization namespaces reflect an organization identifier, similar to how the devcontainer/images repo labels images using the namespace dev.containers.*.

At Datadog, we're working on a devcontainers platform implementation and will likely have our own customization namespace (although it's unlikely to be "registered"), and will probably use com.datadoghq.<tool name>.

@Chuxel
Copy link
Member

Chuxel commented Jun 1, 2023

@avidal Yeah, adding a reverse DNS name under customizations is a safe way to avoid naming conflicts. Love to hear what you are looking into as well!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
documentation Improvements or additions to documentation
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants