>Think of the pause container image The pause container is very much an implementation detail. That's sort of my point. Why would you try to test implementatio

>Think of the pause container image The pause container is very much an implementation detail. That's sort of my point. Why would you try to test implementation details? >You could add a test to make sure that the ca.crt file is always packaged I could, but why? If I wrote a command to put ca.crt there I would expect it to be there unless somebody deliberately took it out. It would be even better if I wrote a command to put ca.crt in the wrong place and then tested to see that it was in the wrong place. The test would be worse than useless in that case - it would fail on a working container and pass on a broken container. The ca.crt is there because it triggers desired behavior - e.g. that you can connect to services over SSL without errors. Test that instead. >The use case is more for infrastructure that explicitly deals with or supports containers. Personally I'd consider containers themselves an implementation detail most of the time - the exception being when you're building containers for other people to use. I still think it's the wrong approach for that too.