GCP Artifact Registry: Should I Use One or Multiple Repositories for Container Images?

When the documentation says that “images and artifacts with the same name, but different tags are organized into repositories,” it’s describing how Artifact Registry groups multiple versions (tags) of what is essentially the same artifact. This statement is about version management rather than a mandate to create separate repositories per project.

Single vs. Multiple Repositories

• Single Repository
  • You can use a single repository to host images from multiple projects, which can simplify management if you have shared images and a unified naming scheme.
  • This approach works well when projects are closely related or managed by the same team, and there’s a need to share container images across boundaries.

• Repository per Project
  • Creating separate repositories for each project is often useful when you need to enforce project-level access controls, isolate images for security or compliance reasons, or simply organize images according to distinct operational contexts.
  • This approach can make it easier to manage permissions, billing, and lifecycle policies unique to each project.

Best Practices & Common Use Cases

• Access Control and Security:
  If different teams or projects have varying levels of access or security requirements, using separate repositories can help enforce stricter permissions.

• Lifecycle and Management:
  Separate repositories allow you to tailor retention, vulnerability scanning, or promotion policies to the specifics of each project’s lifecycle.

• Namespace Clarity:
  Using distinct repositories per project can reduce naming collisions and make the artifact organization more intuitive.

Ultimately, the Artifact Registry is flexible. The choice depends on your organizational structure, security requirements, and how you want to manage image lifecycles. There isn’t a one-size-fits-all rule in the documentation—it’s about what best fits your operational practices.