Prepare for OCI publishing of helm charts to docker hub by janhoy · Pull Request #814 · apache/solr-operator

janhoy · 2026-01-14T15:56:53Z

Fixes #813

Publishes the Helm charts as OCI artifacts, alongside the existing HTTPS chart repository.

Where

oci://ghcr.io/apache/solr-operator/helm/solr-operator
oci://ghcr.io/apache/solr-operator/helm/solr

helm install solr-operator oci://ghcr.io/apache/solr-operator/helm/solr-operator --version 0.10.0
helm install example       oci://ghcr.io/apache/solr-operator/helm/solr --version 0.10.0

No helm repo add, and no credentials — public ghcr.io packages are anonymously pullable.

Why GHCR and not Docker Hub

helm push appends the chart name from Chart.yaml to the target path, and Docker Hub only supports a single namespace level. So on Docker Hub the only legal target is oci://docker.io/apache, giving apache/solr and apache/solr-operator. That would:

consume apache/solr for a chart, rather than leaving it for a future Solr server image, and
mix chart tags and image tags in one tag list on apache/solr-operator.

(The earlier oci://docker.io/apache/solr-operator-chart in this PR would have resolved to a three-level path and simply failed at push — thanks Copilot.)

ghcr.io supports nested paths, so namespacing the charts under solr-operator/helm/ keeps the chart name solr while leaving apache/solr free everywhere. Note ghcr.io/apache/* is one namespace shared by every ASF project, hence the repo-name prefix — the same thing Airflow does with ghcr.io/apache/airflow/....

Deprecation plan

Charts are published to both the OCI registry and https://solr.apache.org/charts throughout the 0.x releases. Starting with v1.0.0, charts are published to the OCI registry only. Documented in the upgrade notes and both chart READMEs.

What's in the workflow

workflow_dispatch with the two chart URLs from dist.apache.org and a dry-run flag. It never builds a chart — it re-publishes a verified copy of one that has already been released and voted on. Also used to backfill older versions.

Downloads keep their original basenames. The .sha512 and .prov files reference the chart's real filename, so the previous rename to solr.tgz broke sha512sum -c.
Downloads and pushes the .prov file, so helm install --verify works against the OCI copy. No release-tooling change needed — build_helm.sh already runs helm package --sign.
Verifies the detached GPG signatures against the Solr KEYS file. The checksums come from the same host as the charts, so on their own they only prove the download wasn't corrupted.
Authenticates with the built-in GITHUB_TOKEN + permissions: packages: write. No secrets to configure.
After pushing, logs out and pulls both charts back anonymously, verifying provenance and checking they're byte-identical to the released artifacts.
Inputs pass through the environment rather than being interpolated into the script body; azure/setup-helm is pinned to a SHA.

Other changes

Chart READMEs, top-level README, and the Antora docs (running-the-operator, local-tutorial, upgrade-notes) lead with OCI, keeping the HTTPS repo documented as deprecated.
Release wizard gains a publish_helm_charts_oci todo after the existing HTTPS publish step.
test_cluster.sh gains -o OCI_REGISTRY to smoke test the published OCI artifacts after a release. CRDs still come from LOCATION, since they aren't part of the OCI artifacts.

Verified

Pre-flight against ghcr.io/janhoy/*, before proposing the apache paths:

Nested pushes work, and a public package is fully anonymously accessible — tag list, helm show chart, and a helm pull that is byte-identical to the pushed artifact, all with no helm registry login.
A 2-level parent and its nested children coexist as independent packages: ghcr.io/janhoy/solr-operator, ghcr.io/janhoy/solr-operator/helm/solr-operator and ghcr.io/janhoy/solr-operator/helm/solr all resolve simultaneously. So nesting the charts under solr-operator/ does not consume ghcr.io/apache/solr-operator — it stays free for a future operator image.
Freshly pushed packages were private, and anonymous pull failed with 401 unauthorized at the token endpoint — which is exactly the failure the workflow's post-push anonymous re-pull is there to catch.

Needs INFRA

ghcr.io creates new packages as private. There is no self-service path to change that: .asf.yaml has no packages/registry feature, selfserve.apache.org doesn't offer it, and there's no REST endpoint (PATCH /user/packages/container/... 404s) — it's web-UI only. So an INFRA ticket is needed to make the two packages public, once per chart name; later versions inherit the visibility. ghcr.io/apache/airflow/... is existing precedent.

Not in this PR

Artifact Hub still indexes the HTTPS repo. Migrating it needs one repo entry per chart and would change every artifacthub.io/packages/helm/apache-solr/... URL, so it's better done as part of the v1.0.0 cutover — dual publishing keeps the current entry accurate meanwhile.
hack/test-upgrade.sh pins v0.2.6/v0.2.8, which exist in neither dist nor archive.apache.org (the archive starts at v0.3.0), so it can't be converted. Follow-up issue.

Copilot

Pull request overview

This PR prepares the Solr Operator project for publishing Helm charts as OCI artifacts to Docker Hub, addressing issue #813 which aims to modernize the chart distribution mechanism.

Changes:

Adds a GitHub Actions workflow for publishing Helm charts to Docker Hub's OCI registry with validation and verification steps
Updates documentation across all README files to include OCI registry installation instructions alongside traditional HTTPS repository methods
Integrates OCI publishing into the release wizard process as a new step after traditional Helm chart publishing

Reviewed changes

Copilot reviewed 5 out of 5 changed files in this pull request and generated 19 comments.

Show a summary per file

File	Description
.github/workflows/publish-helm-oci.yaml	New workflow for publishing charts to OCI registry with URL validation, checksum verification, and dry-run support
helm/solr/README.md	Adds OCI registry installation and upgrade examples with traditional methods as alternatives
helm/solr-operator/README.md	Restructures installation section to prioritize OCI registry approach with detailed instructions for both methods
hack/release/wizard/releaseWizard.yaml	Adds new release task for OCI publishing with step-by-step instructions and verification commands
README.md	Updates main README to highlight OCI registry installation as the recommended approach

💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.

HoustonPutman · 2026-03-26T19:17:30Z

This would be awesome! And since the CRDs are in the apache release archives, I think we can do-away with the nightlies reliance all-together!

The copilot suggestions seem to be true, that it is the "apache" oci repo that we are pushing to, and it will use the name in the charts. Also I would love to not include "chart" in the name if at all possible. Obviously there might be overlap issues with the docker image (at least for the Solr-operator, not necessarily solr itself), so if not possible that's ok, but it'll be much cleaner (and keeping the same name as previous versions) if we just keep it "solr" and "solr-operator"

janhoy · 2026-03-27T00:22:15Z

Yes, ideally we'd have a sub-folder apache/solr-charts/solr and apache/solr-charts/solr-operator. But it seems to be quite flat after the org part, could ask INFRA. There will indeed be a collision between the image name of the solr-operator and the solr-operator-chart. That's why I first thought of using GHCR for the charts, to have a different namespace. That is still an option.

HoustonPutman · 2026-03-27T21:23:33Z

I'm actually not confident there will be a conflict. I just tried it out on houstonputman/solr-operator and you can see a mix of docker images and helm charts:

https://hub.docker.com/repository/docker/houstonputman/solr-operator/general

So at least that issue should be solved.

HoustonPutman · 2026-03-27T21:24:09Z

And the versions will never overlap because the images have versions that start with v and the helm charts do not. So at least we don't have to worry about that!

HoustonPutman · 2026-03-27T21:35:53Z

I love the idea of automating everything, but currently the release manager has to push to docker-hub anyways. Why not just have them also push the helm chart to docker hub? The GitHub action is quite complex.

And eventually we can automate the docker build and push at the same time as automating the helm build and push.

janhoy · 2026-03-27T23:33:41Z

And the versions will never overlap because the images have versions that start with v and the helm charts do not. So at least we don't have to worry about that!

Hmm, I hate the idea of mixing different artifact types on the same OCI path. If I do a list operation on the OCI I'd need to filter on the "^v" each time to just see the versions.

I'm leaning towards publishing helm charts on GHCR for this reason. It's a no-brainer to set it up.

I love the idea of automating everything, but currently the release manager has to push to docker-hub anyways. Why not just have them also push the helm chart to docker hub? The GitHub action is quite complex.

Mainly so not all RMs need to obtain the secret docker-hub credentials which are stored as secrets by INFRA in docker. But also good to have all these steps automated. We could use similar workflow for pushing the operator image?

HoustonPutman · 2026-03-28T00:13:51Z

Hmm, I hate the idea of mixing different artifact types on the same OCI path. If I do a list operation on the OCI I'd need to filter on the "^v" each time to just see the versions.

Yeah, I had assumed that the oci tools (like ORAS) would do a much better job of differentiating artifact types for you. Apparently they do almost nothing, so unless you are looking at the tags in DockerHub, it's very confusing. I would love to have everything in one place, but I'm not against putting the charts in GHCR right now, and it doesn't stop us in the future putting them in both GHCR and DockerHub if ORAS makes differentiating the two better.

Mainly so not all RMs need to obtain the secret docker-hub credentials which are stored as secrets by INFRA in docker. But also good to have all these steps automated. We could use similar workflow for pushing the operator image?

Fair enough, I guess this is a good thing to start with, then we can expand to the image (which will be harder since multi-image build is pretty resource intensive)

Validate url Validate checksum

Docker Hub only supports a single namespace level, so 'helm push' (which appends the chart name from Chart.yaml) can only produce apache/solr and apache/solr-operator there. That burns the apache/solr name on a chart rather than a future Solr server image, and mixes chart tags with image tags in one tag list. The previous target, apache/solr-operator-chart, would have resolved to a three-level path and failed at push. ghcr.io supports nested paths, so the charts go to ghcr.io/apache/solr-operator/helm/{solr,solr-operator}, keeping the chart name 'solr' while leaving apache/solr free everywhere. Public ghcr.io packages are anonymously pullable, so no credentials are needed to install. Workflow changes beyond the registry switch: - Keep the downloaded basenames. The .sha512 and .prov files reference the chart's original filename, so renaming to solr.tgz broke 'sha512sum -c'. - Download and push the .prov file, so 'helm install --verify' works against the OCI copy. - Verify the detached GPG signatures against the Solr KEYS file. The checksums alone come from the same host as the charts. - Authenticate with the built-in GITHUB_TOKEN rather than Docker Hub secrets. - After pushing, log out and pull both charts back anonymously, checking they are byte-identical to the released artifacts. ghcr.io creates packages as private, and this is what catches that. - Pass inputs through the environment and pin azure/setup-helm to a SHA. Charts are published to both the OCI registry and the deprecated HTTPS repository throughout the 0.x releases. Starting with v1.0.0 they will be published to the OCI registry only. test_cluster.sh gains an -o flag to smoke test the published OCI artifacts. Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_017UoVFe4S1qkbw4KurD77Fi

janhoy · 2026-09-03T14:24:53Z

@HoustonPutman I've rebased this on main and reworked it — proposing this as the resolution to our earlier discussion about where the charts should live.

You were right that Docker Hub can host both images and charts in one repo, with the v prefix separating the tag namespaces. My hesitation was that it makes listing awkward, and it means the chart takes the apache/solr name. Rather than argue that trade-off, GHCR sidesteps it entirely: it supports nested paths, so we get

oci://ghcr.io/apache/solr-operator/helm/solr-operator
oci://ghcr.io/apache/solr-operator/helm/solr

The chart keeps its natural name solr (which helm push takes from Chart.yaml and we can't override anyway), while apache/solr stays free on both GHCR and Docker Hub for a future Solr server image, and chart tags never mix with image tags. It also means no new secrets — the built-in GITHUB_TOKEN is enough, where Docker Hub needs credentials in CI.

I verified the mechanics against my own namespace first: nested paths work, and a public package is anonymously pullable with no helm registry login at all. Docker Hub remains an option later if we want it; nothing here forecloses that.

On the transition, I propose we cross-publish: every 0.x release goes to both the OCI registry and https://solr.apache.org/charts, so nobody has to change anything on a patch upgrade. v1.0.0 is then the first OCI-only release — a major version is the natural place to drop the old channel, and it gives users a clear, version-anchored deadline rather than a date that slips with the release schedule. That's what the upgrade notes and both chart READMEs now say. When we get to 1.0.0 we'd drop publish_helm_charts/upload_helm.sh and move the Artifact Hub entries over; I've deliberately left Artifact Hub alone for now, since migrating it would change all the existing artifacthub.io/packages/helm/apache-solr/... URLs.

One thing needing INFRA either way: ghcr.io creates new packages as private, and there's genuinely no self-service path — .asf.yaml has no packages feature, selfserve.apache.org doesn't cover it, and there isn't even a REST endpoint for it. So we'd need a ticket to flip the two packages public. It's a one-time action per chart name, and ghcr.io/apache/airflow/... is existing precedent that INFRA does this.

Does the GHCR path layout look right to you, and are you happy with 1.0.0 as the cutover?

janhoy marked this pull request as draft January 14, 2026 15:57

janhoy requested review from Copilot and gerlowskija January 27, 2026 12:21

Copilot started reviewing on behalf of janhoy January 27, 2026 12:21 View session

Copilot AI reviewed Jan 27, 2026

View reviewed changes

HoustonPutman linked an issue Mar 26, 2026 that may be closed by this pull request

Publish helm charts in OCI registry #813

Open

janhoy added this to the v1.0.0 milestone Apr 7, 2026

janhoy added 2 commits September 3, 2026 16:13

Prepare for OCI publishing of helm charts to docker hub

e79b942

Dry-run flag in workflow

59513bd

Validate url Validate checksum

janhoy force-pushed the helm-oci branch from 7612b16 to 59513bd Compare September 3, 2026 14:14

janhoy mentioned this pull request Sep 3, 2026

Publish helm charts in OCI registry #813

Open

janhoy marked this pull request as ready for review September 3, 2026 14:53

Uh oh!

Conversation

janhoy commented Jan 14, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Where

Why GHCR and not Docker Hub

Deprecation plan

What's in the workflow

Other changes

Verified

Needs INFRA

Not in this PR

Uh oh!

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Pull request overview

Reviewed changes

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

HoustonPutman commented Mar 26, 2026

Uh oh!

janhoy commented Mar 27, 2026

Uh oh!

HoustonPutman commented Mar 27, 2026

Uh oh!

HoustonPutman commented Mar 27, 2026

Uh oh!

HoustonPutman commented Mar 27, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

janhoy commented Mar 27, 2026

Uh oh!

HoustonPutman commented Mar 28, 2026

Uh oh!

janhoy commented Sep 3, 2026

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

3 participants

janhoy commented Jan 14, 2026 •

edited

Loading

HoustonPutman commented Mar 27, 2026 •

edited

Loading