Docker Hub README -> GitHub README?

[joshtrichards]

Maintaining the README on the Docker Hub entry has some challenges:

• ends up out of date (we update the GitHub README more often than we port over the changes to Docker Hub)
• some GitHub markdown conventions are not supported by Docker Hub (e.g. call-outs)
• it's more work for us

Questions:

• Is it okay for Docker Official Images to replace their Docker Hub contents (beyond the essentials like tags and some basic introductory context/etc) with a link to their GitHub README or other docs?
• If so, should we do this?
• Or, if we keep it, should we consider automating some of the updating?
• And, if we keep it, are the unsupported markdown bits worth keeping on GitHub?

[isdnfan]

From my personal experience I would expect Docker Hub to include most important details to review the image and explain how to get started. But with this image hitting the 25k characters limit (since forever?) it makes no sense to stay with the current approach.

Note: the description for this image is longer than the Hub length limit of 25000, so has been trimmed. ...

I would appreciate both Docker Hub and Github main readme would switch from the "bible" explaining everything to a tiny rather reduced copy showing the concepts and very very reduced basic usage and moving "advanced" and "optional" stuff to a separate chapters. I feel we could adopt the "AiO approach approach" where some topics have own home. In case of this image I would suggest to move s3, secrets usage, reverse proxy and detailed variables list to move to dedicated optional readme sections. Maybe moving this part out of main readme would already solve the DH 25k limit and allow to continue Github=Docker Hub approach.. If this doesn't work it would be best to change the Docker Hub from Github copy to some "specially crafted for DH" content.