Follow-up to #728.
This fixes broken links due to file renames.
Fixes#788.
🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)
Co-authored-by: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>
<!-- Provide a brief summary of your changes -->
## Motivation and Context
<!-- Why is this change needed? What problem does it solve? -->
The following PR implements the missing support for logging in via
`--token` or `MCP_GITHUB_TOKEN`
## How Has This Been Tested?
<!-- Have you tested this in a real application? Which scenarios were
tested? -->
## Breaking Changes
<!-- Will users need to update their code or configurations? -->
## Types of changes
<!-- What types of changes does your code introduce? Put an `x` in all
the boxes that apply: -->
- [ ] Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
- [ ] New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
- [ ] Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing
functionality to change)
- [ ] Documentation update
## Checklist
<!-- Go over all the following points, and put an `x` in all the boxes
that apply. -->
- [ ] I have read the [MCP
Documentation](https://modelcontextprotocol.io)
- [ ] My code follows the repository's style guidelines
- [ ] New and existing tests pass locally
- [ ] I have added appropriate error handling
- [ ] I have added or updated documentation as needed
## Additional context
<!-- Add any other context, implementation notes, or design decisions
-->
Fixes: #698
---------
Signed-off-by: Radoslav Dimitrov <radoslav@stacklok.com>
<!-- Provide a brief summary of your changes -->
## Motivation and Context
<!-- Why is this change needed? What problem does it solve? -->
The Repository field in ServerJSON was not properly omitting empty
values
when marshaling to JSON. Even when a server had no repository
configured,
the JSON would include `"repository": {"url": "", "source": ""}` due to:
1. Repository struct fields (URL, Source) lacking omitempty tags
2. Repository being a value type instead of pointer in ServerJSON
This caused validation warnings for servers without repository URLs.
Changes:
- Add omitempty tags to Repository.URL and Repository.Source fields
- Change ServerJSON.Repository from model.Repository to
*model.Repository
- Update validateRepository to handle nil pointers
- Update all code creating Repository instances to use pointers
Now, servers without repository information correctly omit the field
entirely from JSON output, eliminating spurious validation warnings.
## How Has This Been Tested?
<!-- Have you tested this in a real application? Which scenarios were
tested? -->
## Breaking Changes
<!-- Will users need to update their code or configurations? -->
## Types of changes
<!-- What types of changes does your code introduce? Put an `x` in all
the boxes that apply: -->
- [ ] Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
- [ ] New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
- [ ] Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing
functionality to change)
- [ ] Documentation update
## Checklist
<!-- Go over all the following points, and put an `x` in all the boxes
that apply. -->
- [ ] I have read the [MCP
Documentation](https://modelcontextprotocol.io)
- [ ] My code follows the repository's style guidelines
- [ ] New and existing tests pass locally
- [ ] I have added appropriate error handling
- [ ] I have added or updated documentation as needed
## Additional context
<!-- Add any other context, implementation notes, or design decisions
-->
Signed-off-by: Radoslav Dimitrov <radoslav@stacklok.com>
<!-- Provide a brief summary of your changes -->
## Motivation and Context
This allows the private key used for DNS or HTTP based authentication to
be stored securely in a cloud key management system. These services
often provide HSM storage which makes it very hard to leak the private
key.
The full context is described in my design document here:
https://github.com/modelcontextprotocol/registry/issues/482#issuecomment-3437117171
## How Has This Been Tested?
I have tested it against PROD using an Ed25519 key stored in Google KMS.
I have added unit tests. I have tested both ECDSA P-384 and Ed25519 with
Az KV and Google KMS against a locally running server.
## Breaking Changes
None intended.
## Types of changes
<!-- What types of changes does your code introduce? Put an `x` in all
the boxes that apply: -->
- [ ] Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
- [x] New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
- [ ] Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing
functionality to change)
- [x] Documentation update
## Checklist
<!-- Go over all the following points, and put an `x` in all the boxes
that apply. -->
- [x] I have read the [MCP
Documentation](https://modelcontextprotocol.io)
- [x] My code follows the repository's style guidelines
- [x] New and existing tests pass locally
- [x] I have added appropriate error handling
- [x] I have added or updated documentation as needed
## Additional context
<!-- Add any other context, implementation notes, or design decisions
-->
---------
Co-authored-by: adam jones <domdomegg+git@gmail.com>
<!-- Provide a brief summary of your changes -->
## Motivation and Context
Discussion from this issue:
https://github.com/modelcontextprotocol/registry/issues/538
We want to make it clearer that repo name & server name do not HAVE to
be the same, especially in monorepos.
@tadasant this seems like a minor thing that doesn't have to be
documented specifically, lmk if you disagree :)
## How Has This Been Tested?
Tested the init flow locally, running the built `init` command from a
subfolder and the repo root.
## Breaking Changes
No
## Types of changes
<!-- What types of changes does your code introduce? Put an `x` in all
the boxes that apply: -->
- [ ] Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
- [x] New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
- [ ] Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing
functionality to change)
- [ ] Documentation update
## Checklist
<!-- Go over all the following points, and put an `x` in all the boxes
that apply. -->
- [x] I have read the [MCP
Documentation](https://modelcontextprotocol.io)
- [x] My code follows the repository's style guidelines
- [x] New and existing tests pass locally
- [x] I have added appropriate error handling
- [x] I have added or updated documentation as needed
## Additional context
<!-- Add any other context, implementation notes, or design decisions
-->
<!-- Provide a brief summary of your changes -->
## Motivation and Context
<!-- Why is this change needed? What problem does it solve? -->
The following fixes the currently failing build on main because we
reverted to go 1.24 and the last commit was relying on a method solely
available in 1.25.
The method is quite straightforward so we just reimplemented it.
## How Has This Been Tested?
<!-- Have you tested this in a real application? Which scenarios were
tested? -->
## Breaking Changes
<!-- Will users need to update their code or configurations? -->
## Types of changes
<!-- What types of changes does your code introduce? Put an `x` in all
the boxes that apply: -->
- [ ] Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
- [ ] New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
- [ ] Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing
functionality to change)
- [ ] Documentation update
## Checklist
<!-- Go over all the following points, and put an `x` in all the boxes
that apply. -->
- [ ] I have read the [MCP
Documentation](https://modelcontextprotocol.io)
- [ ] My code follows the repository's style guidelines
- [ ] New and existing tests pass locally
- [ ] I have added appropriate error handling
- [ ] I have added or updated documentation as needed
## Additional context
<!-- Add any other context, implementation notes, or design decisions
-->
Signed-off-by: Radoslav Dimitrov <radoslav@stacklok.com>
## Motivation and Context
See
https://github.com/modelcontextprotocol/registry/issues/482#issuecomment-3436993157
for full details.
This adds ECDSA P-384 (a popular NIST approved curve) in addition to
Ed25519.
## How Has This Been Tested?
I have tested with a local deployment against `mcp.joelverhagen.com`.
Also, I have added significant tests.
## Breaking Changes
None. (hopefully)
## Types of changes
<!-- What types of changes does your code introduce? Put an `x` in all
the boxes that apply: -->
- [ ] Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
- [x] New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
- [ ] Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing
functionality to change)
- [x] Documentation update
## Checklist
<!-- Go over all the following points, and put an `x` in all the boxes
that apply. -->
- [x] I have read the [MCP
Documentation](https://modelcontextprotocol.io)
- [x] My code follows the repository's style guidelines
- [x] New and existing tests pass locally
- [x] I have added appropriate error handling
- [x] I have added or updated documentation as needed
## Additional context
<!-- Add any other context, implementation notes, or design decisions
-->
@domdomegg and I spoke a bit about this on Discord:
https://discord.com/channels/1358869848138059966/1369487942862504016/1423710918180606052
---------
Co-authored-by: adam jones <domdomegg+git@gmail.com>
<!-- Provide a brief summary of your changes -->
## Motivation and Context
<!-- Why is this change needed? What problem does it solve? -->
The following PR:
* Makes mcpb package version property optional
* Bumps the schema and reflects that in the code
* Makes sure the publisher tests are being covered by doing `make check`
## How Has This Been Tested?
<!-- Have you tested this in a real application? Which scenarios were
tested? -->
## Breaking Changes
<!-- Will users need to update their code or configurations? -->
## Types of changes
<!-- What types of changes does your code introduce? Put an `x` in all
the boxes that apply: -->
- [ ] Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
- [ ] New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
- [ ] Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing
functionality to change)
- [ ] Documentation update
## Checklist
<!-- Go over all the following points, and put an `x` in all the boxes
that apply. -->
- [ ] I have read the [MCP
Documentation](https://modelcontextprotocol.io)
- [ ] My code follows the repository's style guidelines
- [ ] New and existing tests pass locally
- [ ] I have added appropriate error handling
- [ ] I have added or updated documentation as needed
## Additional context
<!-- Add any other context, implementation notes, or design decisions
-->
---------
Signed-off-by: Radoslav Dimitrov <radoslav@stacklok.com>
<!-- Provide a brief summary of your changes -->
## Motivation and Context
<!-- Why is this change needed? What problem does it solve? -->
The following PR:
* Enforces schema validation on the API level (requests without schema
or older schema will fail)
* Updates the unit tests and examples to match that
## How Has This Been Tested?
<!-- Have you tested this in a real application? Which scenarios were
tested? -->
## Breaking Changes
<!-- Will users need to update their code or configurations? -->
**Note this can be considered breaking if clients have not included it
before.**
## Types of changes
<!-- What types of changes does your code introduce? Put an `x` in all
the boxes that apply: -->
- [ ] Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
- [ ] New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
- [ ] Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing
functionality to change)
- [ ] Documentation update
## Checklist
<!-- Go over all the following points, and put an `x` in all the boxes
that apply. -->
- [ ] I have read the [MCP
Documentation](https://modelcontextprotocol.io)
- [ ] My code follows the repository's style guidelines
- [ ] New and existing tests pass locally
- [ ] I have added appropriate error handling
- [ ] I have added or updated documentation as needed
## Additional context
<!-- Add any other context, implementation notes, or design decisions
-->
---------
Signed-off-by: Radoslav Dimitrov <radoslav@stacklok.com>
## Summary
- Applied `gofmt -s -w` across the entire codebase to ensure consistent
Go formatting
- This will trigger a deployment with minimal code changes
## Test plan
- [x] Pre-commit hooks pass
- [x] No functional changes, formatting only
🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)
Co-authored-by: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>
- Add workflow_dispatch to deploy.yml for manual deployment triggers
- Document that releases don't auto-deploy to production
- Add instructions for deploying releases to production
- Add verification steps for deployment
🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)
Co-Authored-By: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>
Wielded Claude Code to do this; across many iterations and have reviewed
all the code + largely rewritten the PR commentary here.
This PR implements the server ID consistency changes from
[#396](https://github.com/modelcontextprotocol/registry/issues/396). Our
goal is to:
- Rename `id` to `versionId` to make it clear that it is the ID for a
specific version, not a server
- Introduce `serverId` as a net new concept. This will be 1:1 with
`name`. While not strictly necessary (we could just use name as a PK),
the convention of having a UUID as an ID on our objects is just a
helpful subjective architecture decision. Plus also leaves open the door
to reconsidering the "should we allow renames" question.
## Key Changes
### 🗄️ Database Schema Changes
- **Renamed**: `id` column → `version_id` (unique identifier for each
server version)
### 📋 Metadata Structure Updates
- **JSON Schema**: Updated
`_meta.io.modelcontextprotocol.registry/official` to include:
- `serverId`: Consistent ID across all versions of a server
- `versionId`: Unique ID for this specific version (renamed from `id`)
### 🔧 API Endpoint Updates
- **New endpoint structure**: Changed from version-ID-based to
server-ID-based URLs:
- `GET /v0/servers/{server_id}` - Get latest version of server
- `GET /v0/servers/{server_id}?version=X.X.X` - Get specific version
- `GET /v0/servers/{server_id}/versions` - List all versions of a server
- `PUT /v0/servers/{server_id}?version=X.X.X` - Edit specific version
- **Consistent URL patterns**: All server endpoints now use `server_id`
as the primary identifier
### Database Migration Strategy
The migration (`005_add_server_id_rename_version_id.sql`):
1. Adds new `version_id` column
2. Generates deterministic UUIDs for servers with the same name
3. Updates JSON metadata to add `serverId` and rename `id` to
`versionId`
4. Copies existing `id` values to `version_id` column
5. Drops old `id` column and makes `version_id` the new primary key
## Testing
Besides of course automated tests passing, I:
1. Set up my local db with the pre-005-migration state, imported all the
production data
2. Ran the migration
3. Spot checked some diffs of the data that resulted --
```json
// before
{
"name": "io.github.ruvnet/ruv-swarm",
"_meta": {
"io.modelcontextprotocol.registry/official": {
"id": "0a9cda7f-2b73-4839-844b-6582f335de42",
"is_latest": false,
"updated_at": "2025-09-10T17:21:34.92137012Z",
"published_at": "2025-09-10T17:15:32.69690433Z"
}
},
"version": "1.0.18",
"repository": {
"url": "",
"source": ""
},
"description": "Neural network swarm orchestration with WebAssembly acceleration and MCP integration"
}
// after
{
"name": "io.github.ruvnet/ruv-swarm",
"_meta": {
"io.modelcontextprotocol.registry/official": {
"serverId": "e8538952-96af-4a33-9e31-7fbed012521e",
"is_latest": false,
"versionId": "0a9cda7f-2b73-4839-844b-6582f335de42",
"updated_at": "2025-09-10T17:21:34.92137012Z",
"published_at": "2025-09-10T17:15:32.69690433Z"
}
},
"version": "1.0.18",
"repository": {
"url": "",
"source": ""
},
"description": "Neural network swarm orchestration with WebAssembly acceleration and MCP integration"
}
```
Servers that have multiple versions stayed consistent in their
`serverId`:
```json
// First version
{
"name": "app.getdialer/dialer",
"_meta": {
"io.modelcontextprotocol.registry/official": {
"serverId": "80f08bdb-f3e4-4f19-b072-1676ae49b663",
"is_latest": false,
"versionId": "04f25b17-331d-48d7-b08b-37baece208a7",
"updated_at": "2025-09-09T00:16:49.162620072Z",
"published_at": "2025-09-08T23:47:09.452137971Z"
}
},
"status": "active",
"$schema": "https://static.modelcontextprotocol.io/schemas/2025-07-09/server.schema.json",
"remotes": [
{
"url": "https://getdialer.app/mcp",
"type": "streamable-http"
},
{
"url": "https://getdialer.app/sse",
"type": "sse"
}
],
"version": "1.0.0",
"repository": {
"url": "",
"source": ""
},
"description": "An MCP server that provides your you make outbound phone calls using your own phone number"
}
// Second version
{
"name": "app.getdialer/dialer",
"_meta": {
"io.modelcontextprotocol.registry/official": {
"serverId": "80f08bdb-f3e4-4f19-b072-1676ae49b663",
"is_latest": true,
"versionId": "faa26cb9-3aad-415e-aece-f715fff5fe5e",
"updated_at": "2025-09-09T00:16:49.107842808Z",
"published_at": "2025-09-09T00:16:49.107842808Z"
}
},
"status": "active",
"$schema": "https://static.modelcontextprotocol.io/schemas/2025-07-09/server.schema.json",
"remotes": [
{
"url": "https://getdialer.app/mcp",
"type": "streamable-http"
},
{
"url": "https://getdialer.app/sse",
"type": "sse"
}
],
"version": "1.0.1",
"repository": {
"url": "",
"source": ""
},
"description": "An MCP server that provides lets you make outbound phone calls using your own phone number"
}
```
And I also tried publishing a test server anew; looked good:
```bash
⏺ Bash(curl -s "http://localhost:8080/v0/servers/102dc4e4-6ca8-40e6-aa11-cd45763d3352" | jq '.')
⎿ {
"$schema": "https://static.modelcontextprotocol.io/schemas/2025-07-09/server.schema.json",
"name": "io.modelcontextprotocol.anonymous/test-claude-migration-server",
"description": "A test server to verify the new migration and API endpoints work correctly",
"status": "active",
"repository": {
"url": "https://github.com/example/test-claude-migration-server",
"source": "github",
"id": "example/test-claude-migration-server"
},
"version": "1.0.0",
"_meta": {
"io.modelcontextprotocol.registry/official": {
"serverId": "102dc4e4-6ca8-40e6-aa11-cd45763d3352",
"versionId": "48c9cd55-7bc4-4ac2-896e-59e81eb653e4",
"published_at": "2025-09-12T18:33:23.264203-07:00",
"updated_at": "2025-09-12T18:33:23.264203-07:00",
"is_latest": true
}
}
}
⏺ Bash(curl -s "http://localhost:8080/v0/servers/102dc4e4-6ca8-40e6-aa11-cd45763d3352/versions" | jq '.')
⎿ {
"servers": [
{
"$schema": "https://static.modelcontextprotocol.io/schemas/2025-07-09/server.schema.json",
"name": "io.modelcontextprotocol.anonymous/test-claude-migration-server",
"description": "A test server to verify the new migration and API endpoints work correctly",
"status": "active",
"repository": {
"url": "https://github.com/example/test-claude-migration-server",
"source": "github",
"id": "example/test-claude-migration-server"
},
"version": "1.0.0",
"_meta": {
"io.modelcontextprotocol.registry/official": {
"serverId": "102dc4e4-6ca8-40e6-aa11-cd45763d3352",
"versionId": "48c9cd55-7bc4-4ac2-896e-59e81eb653e4",
"published_at": "2025-09-12T18:33:23.264203-07:00",
"updated_at": "2025-09-12T18:33:23.264203-07:00",
"is_latest": true
}
}
}
],
"metadata": {
"count": 1
}
}
```
Co-Authored-By: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>
---------
Co-authored-by: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>
Co-authored-by: Preeti Dewani <preetidewani1990@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: adam jones <adamj+git@anthropic.com>
Co-authored-by: Adam Jones <adamj@anthropic.com>
When using `mcp-publisher publish ...`, output the new server `ID` if
publishing is successful.
## Motivation and Context
It's useful to know this during testing. It means that you don't have to
go and search for the new server ID afterwards. Once we have the
`v0/servers/{name}/{version}`, I think we could consider removing this
again.
## How Has This Been Tested?
I've been using this while I test publishing to locally running
registries.
## Breaking Changes
none
## Types of changes
<!-- What types of changes does your code introduce? Put an `x` in all
the boxes that apply: -->
- [ ] Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
- [x] New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
- [ ] Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing
functionality to change)
- [ ] Documentation update
## Checklist
<!-- Go over all the following points, and put an `x` in all the boxes
that apply. -->
- [x] I have read the [MCP
Documentation](https://modelcontextprotocol.io)
- [x] My code follows the repository's style guidelines
- [ ] New and existing tests pass locally
- [x] I have added appropriate error handling
- [x] I have added or updated documentation as needed
## Summary
Simplified the schema structure by:
- Replacing `version_detail.version` with direct `version` field
- Removing unused `release_date` field from seed data
- Updating all API types, models, and tests to match new structure
- Maintaining backwards compatibility in API responses
This change makes the schema more intuitive and reduces nesting depth.
<!-- Provide a brief summary of your changes -->
## Motivation and Context
<!-- Why is this change needed? What problem does it solve? -->
The following PR introduces Goreleaser for the releases of the registry
server and the publisher CLI.
**Details:**
- Builds registry and publisher binaries for Linux, macOS, and Windows
(amd64 + arm64)
- Leverage GitHub's release process by creating releases directly from
GitHub's interface
- Added .goreleaser.yaml configuration
- New .github/workflows/release.yml workflow triggered by GitHub
releases
- Updated Docker tagging in deploy workflow (:latest and :semver(the
tag) for releases, :main-YYYYMMDD-sha for testing/development)
- Consolidated version handling in main.go files
- Added release documentation
## How Has This Been Tested?
<!-- Have you tested this in a real application? Which scenarios were
tested? -->
Locally (but we have to test it by creating a release, i.e. v0.0.1 once
this gets merged)
## Breaking Changes
<!-- Will users need to update their code or configurations? -->
Yes, the notion of `latest` for the container image is now different
## Types of changes
<!-- What types of changes does your code introduce? Put an `x` in all
the boxes that apply: -->
- [ ] Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
- [x] New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
- [ ] Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing
functionality to change)
- [ ] Documentation update
## Checklist
<!-- Go over all the following points, and put an `x` in all the boxes
that apply. -->
- [ ] I have read the [MCP
Documentation](https://modelcontextprotocol.io)
- [ ] My code follows the repository's style guidelines
- [ ] New and existing tests pass locally
- [ ] I have added appropriate error handling
- [ ] I have added or updated documentation as needed
## Additional context
<!-- Add any other context, implementation notes, or design decisions
-->
Related to #358
---------
Signed-off-by: Radoslav Dimitrov <radoslav@stacklok.com>
## Motivation and Context
Docs currently don't have very clear organisation, and don't explain
core flows.
This fixes#89 (although we still might want to push these to
`https://modelcontextprotocol.io/docs/`), based on the plan there.
One minor change from that plan is that I merged tutorials and guides,
because they ended up basically being duplicates which I thought would
be annoying for us to keep in sync. Additionally in the Diátaxis
framework, tutorials and guides are separated by whether they are
focused on acquisition of skills (e.g. in a learning environment) or
application of skills (e.g. in a work environment). I expect the
registry to be something that will be used occasionally in a work
environment, rather than a fundamental 'learnable' skill so I think it's
reasonable not to have tutorials and fold these into guides.
## How Has This Been Tested?
- Read through all these updated docs
- Unit and integration tests (that previously used examples.md and use
the schema) working
- Ran `npx markdown-link-check .` to check all the links work
## Breaking Changes
Links to old docs will break, but I don't think there are any. All
internal links have been checked and updated.
## Types of changes
<!-- What types of changes does your code introduce? Put an `x` in all
the boxes that apply: -->
- [ ] Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
- [ ] New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
- [ ] Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing
functionality to change)
- [x] Documentation update
<!-- Provide a brief summary of your changes -->
## Motivation and Context
<!-- Why is this change needed? What problem does it solve? -->
The following PR:
* Adds a new `transport` type used in Package and Remotes
* Added `docker` to the `runtime_hint` examples
* Added support for templated URLs. It is available for streamable-http
and sse transports for Packages. I didn't thought of reasons to have
this for Remotes, but we can enable it if needed.
* Added validation for templated URLs so we can ensure all referenced
placeholder variables are available.
* For streamable-http and SSE transport types the URL is now a required
property
* Updated the publisher init command to reflect these changes
* Updated the seed.json file
* Added unit tests for the transport type related changes
* Updated the server.json schema and the external pkg structs to reflect
the new transport type
* Updated the examples
Thanks to @kkkarthik for spotting it! 🙏
## How Has This Been Tested?
<!-- Have you tested this in a real application? Which scenarios were
tested? -->
Ran the tests locally
## Breaking Changes
<!-- Will users need to update their code or configurations? -->
Yes
## Types of changes
<!-- What types of changes does your code introduce? Put an `x` in all
the boxes that apply: -->
- [ ] Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
- [ ] New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
- [x] Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing
functionality to change)
- [ ] Documentation update
## Checklist
<!-- Go over all the following points, and put an `x` in all the boxes
that apply. -->
- [ ] I have read the [MCP
Documentation](https://modelcontextprotocol.io)
- [ ] My code follows the repository's style guidelines
- [ ] New and existing tests pass locally
- [ ] I have added appropriate error handling
- [ ] I have added or updated documentation as needed
## Additional context
<!-- Add any other context, implementation notes, or design decisions
-->
---------
Signed-off-by: Radoslav Dimitrov <radoslav@stacklok.com>
Fixes#96
## Motivation and Context
See #96
## How Has This Been Tested?
Has some unit and integration tests, still needs proper testing of the
different registry types
## Breaking Changes
Yes, new package uploads will need extra verification
## Types of changes
<!-- What types of changes does your code introduce? Put an `x` in all
the boxes that apply: -->
- [ ] Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
- [x] New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
- [x] Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing
functionality to change)
- [ ] Documentation update
<!-- Provide a brief summary of your changes -->
## Motivation and Context
<!-- Why is this change needed? What problem does it solve? -->
The following PR updates some of the hardcoded references to public
constants.
## How Has This Been Tested?
<!-- Have you tested this in a real application? Which scenarios were
tested? -->
Locally
## Breaking Changes
<!-- Will users need to update their code or configurations? -->
No
## Types of changes
<!-- What types of changes does your code introduce? Put an `x` in all
the boxes that apply: -->
- [x] Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
- [ ] New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
- [ ] Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing
functionality to change)
- [ ] Documentation update
## Checklist
<!-- Go over all the following points, and put an `x` in all the boxes
that apply. -->
- [ ] I have read the [MCP
Documentation](https://modelcontextprotocol.io)
- [ ] My code follows the repository's style guidelines
- [ ] New and existing tests pass locally
- [ ] I have added appropriate error handling
- [ ] I have added or updated documentation as needed
## Additional context
<!-- Add any other context, implementation notes, or design decisions
-->
Signed-off-by: Radoslav Dimitrov <radoslav@stacklok.com>
Updates the registry type for all Docker Hub packages in the seed data
from `docker-hub` to `oci` to align with the standardized OCI registry
format. This change affects the `registry_type` field and simplifies the
`identifier` field by removing the full Docker Hub URL prefix.
Changes:
- Updated `registry_type` from `docker-hub` to `oci` for all Docker
packages
- Simplified `identifier` field to use just the repository name/path
instead of full URLs
- Maintained `registry_base_url` as `https://docker.io` for all entries
This refactoring improves consistency and aligns with OCI standards
while maintaining backward compatibility through the registry base URL.
## Summary
Move the publisher CLI from `tools/publisher/` to `cmd/publisher/` as
it's a proper application rather than a development utility.
This addresses feedback from @rdimitrov in PR #324 that the publisher
CLI should be under `cmd/` since it's not really a tool in the same
sense as other helpers in the `tools/` folder.
## Changes
- Moved `tools/publisher/` directory to `cmd/publisher/`
- Updated Makefile build and clean targets
- Updated README.md documentation links
- Updated VS Code launch configuration
- Updated integration test script
- Updated FAQ documentation
- Fixed Go import paths in publisher code
---------
Co-authored-by: claude[bot] <209825114+claude[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: adam jones <domdomegg@users.noreply.github.com>
