remove comment

[zhouhao3]

Signed-off-by: zhouhao zhouhao@cn.fujitsu.com

[cyphar]

NACK. There's a very good reason that JSON doesn't support comments. While you might not agree with it, it is a valid reason. Not to mention that the runtime-spec specifically tells runtimes to ignore fields they don't recognise (so using comment should already work).

[crosbymichael]

What does this PR actually do? I don't understand.

[wking]

On Tue, Mar 07, 2017 at 06:06:15AM -0800, Aleksa Sarai wrote: NACK. There's a very good reason that JSON doesn't support comments.

This PR is catching the JSON Schema up with [1]. If you don't want comments in the JSON, you probably want to file a PR removing the Go field. [1]: https://github.com/opencontainers/runtime-spec/pull/657/files#diff-7f24d60f0cbb9c433e165467e3d34838R535

[cyphar]

-_- Yeah, IMO that should be reverted -- what was the original reason for that field?

[crosbymichael]

I think that just slipped by. Its not necessary for the spec so we should probably remove it. The spec should be short and concise, only containing information required for the creation/execution of a container.

I can see that a comment is a nice to have but not required and probably shouldn't be in the spec.

[zhouhao3]

So the result of your discussion is to delete the comment field? Is there a clear rule to delete comment?

[crosbymichael]

@q384566678 ya, I don't think it should have been added in the first place and just slipped by in review. We don't have any other comment fields in the spec.

[zhouhao3]

@crosbymichael As you said, I think should delete the comment in the spec, as I did in b7a172d.

[cyphar]

👍

[hqhq]

typo?

[zhouhao3]

updated, PTAL

[hqhq]

LGTM

[crosbymichael]

LGTM