If anyone is interested: https://hub.docker.com/r/texlive/texlive/tags, the TL<YEAR>-historic-tree* tags are those that contain only the TeX Live trees (for Linux x86-64). We have not publicly announced the names yet but probably they will stay as is.
islandoftex/images/texlive#11 is what I had in mind after all. Simply build the images per scheme which would be one matrix entry more in the CI file. And as I said, the update strategy as per the other issue would be orthogonal to that split.
Those would be the final images, but the idea we discussed in #5 was that a latest-* image would be a combination of base (Debian) and tree-*, where tree-* would update weekly, but base only once say half a year.
And the tree-* images, which we would build at the beginning of TL's annual cycle could be build on top of each other (such as tree-full using tree-minimal).
The latest-* images would not care and could be just a matrix entry as you say.
This way, we get rid of most of the duplication, get incremental updates in time and we get Debian's security updates.
Definitely, let's break these changes into small bits. It's the only way any of this gets done. 👍️
What I don't entirely understand is this, because I never cared much about schemes: is there a nice division of packages into schemes without much duplication? Because is seems to me that schemes overlap and for example Debian packagers have to completely reorder things to get rid of duplication.
Would it make sense to provide images for collections rather than schemes?
Of course, it would be best if each TL package would be its own “layer”. That would have the best composition. But then we would be at Nix level (package manager), not at Docker level (distribution layer).
Actually, we should have far more of these conversation in a structured way in issues so that they are accessible in the project. But on the other hand, quick questions and responses are still better in messengers like Matrix.