`charmcraft` 2.1.0 includes [this fix](https://github.com/canonical/charmcraft/pull/871) which patched a bug with how `charmcraft upload-resource --image ____` handled image ID/digests for uploading oci images. Prior to this patch, `charmcraft upload-resource` would successfully upload images provided by tagged image name (`charmcraft upload-resource --image ubuntu:22.10` worked), but this patch inadvertently blocks this usage because it interprets any input string that includes a `:` as a digest (so `--image ubuntu:22.10` will be interpreted as a digest). [The upload-resource documentation](https://discourse.charmhub.io/t/charmcrafts-upload-resource-command/4580) states that the `--image` flag accepts only the short digest (aka image id) or the long digest (eg: `sha256:...1), and that *it does not accept the image `name:tag`* for uploading oci images, so there was never intent to allow image uploads by tagged name even though it did function that way prior to version 2.1.0 Although the documentation clearly states image should be specified by ID/digest, a large portion of the charming community has interpreted the `--image` argument as a typical named image reference, as is common in other tools in the ecosystem (example: [kubernetes container spec](https://kubernetes.io/docs/reference/kubernetes-api/workload-resources/pod-v1/#image) uses the name `image` and accepts `imagename:tag` or `imagename@digest`). This means that 2.1.0 was a breaking change for anyone who used the tool this way. At least 2 Canonical teams (~30 charms) had CI that broke from this patch, and [searching Canonical's org for `metadata.yaml` files that reference images by tagged name](https://github.com/search?p=5&q=org%3Acanonical+%22upstream-source%22+filename%3Ametadata.yaml&type=Code) suggests all or nearly all charms are referencing images by tagged name rather than digest. This means it is likely this is an accidental breaking change for others as well. It would be helpful if this change was reverted (or modified so that tagged images were allowed). If the requirement is to not use tagged image names, a deprecation period seems appropriate given its wide use. It would also be helpful if `charmcraft`'s integration testing include some of the community's charms and tooling so that breaking changes (even if they adhere to the stated behaviour of the tool) are caught before reaching production.