Good point! I think we had previously discussed it, and decided against doing it at the moment, but it makes sense to want to tag it as a different tag, in order to test it out first. I wouldn't want to override the publish flag to use it for adding a new tag, because then it would be a change in UX from the rest of the contexts where we have that flag.

One open question - In pack build, that -t/--tag flag is used to specify additional tags, in addition to the output image name. Here, would we want -t/--tag to specify additional tags, or the only tags released by the command?

Looking into the technical details, the core of the rebase operation is done by the lifecycle here, and having a different output tag for the rebase operation is sanctioned according to the spec.

Given that, we'd welcome a PR, once we have a resolution about the UX of the tag flag! It should be as simple as:

1. Adding a Tags []string array to the pkg/client/RebaseOptions
2. Add a -t/--tag flag in the internal/commands/rebase.go definition (changing it to StringVarP, so that it can have a -t shortform)
3. Pass that tag/tags, if present, to the lifecycle in pkg/client/rebase.go
4. Ensure previous tests pass, and add new unit/integration tests (no need for acceptance tests)

Related RFC: https://github.com/buildpacks/rfcs/blob/main/text/0115-rebase-immutable-image-ref.md

@joeybrown-sf any additional thoughts here?

I think this is a reasonable request. In lifecycle, the -previous-image flag can be used to accomplish this.

For instance, in the following example we want to rebase the image foobar:22 but do not want to overwrite the image. Instead, we want to write it to a new tag, foobar:23.

The command to accomplish this is as follows:

CNB_PLATFORM_API=0.11 lifecycle rebase -previous-image localhost:5003/test/tester/foobar:22 localhost:5003/test/tester/foobar:23

I would probably recommend the same flag name for consistency. Pack build also has the previous-image flag.

Hi @natalieparellano @dfreilich
if this issue is not been worked yet, can I go for this?

@Parthiba-Hazra that would be great! I will assign you

@natalieparellano is there any thing you want share with me before diving on this enhancement, maybe something that can help to get with started? anyway I am going for this.

@Parthiba-Hazra apologies for being slow to respond here - I'll discuss with @jjbustamante and one of us should get back early next week

@natalieparellano yes sure, I opened a pr on this one, it does the result. I will need some review on that.

Thank you @Parthiba-Hazra

I will try to take a look on this and review it!