-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 82
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Bump up runtime-spec/image-spec to the latest version #69
Conversation
@@ -12,3 +12,6 @@ import: | |||
- package: github.com/pkg/errors | |||
version: ~0.7.1 | |||
- package: github.com/spf13/cobra | |||
version: 9c28e4bbd74e5c3ed7aacbc552b2cab7cfdfe744 | |||
- package: github.com/spf13/pflag | |||
version: 7b17cc4658ef5ca157b986ea5c0b43af7938532b |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It doesn't look like pflag tags releases. Is there a particular reason you're pinning here instead of at the current tip (spf13/pflag@5ccb023)? Just because that's the currently-vendored commit? I'm fine with that, but would like a note to that effect in the commit message. Something like:
pflag doesn't tag releases, so I'm pinning this at our currently-vendored commit. I'm not aware of any reason we can't advance this to a later pflag commit, but haven't done enough research to say for sure. This commit is only focused on bumping the vendored image-spec.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
OK,It's fine to add some notes.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Did you add a note like this somewhere?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yeah, in Git somewhere, in case we leave GitHub or something ;)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It's a good idea.Updated it:)
Bumping image-spec to a tagged release sounds great to me. On Wed, Nov 02, 2016 at 02:37:44AM -0700, Ye Yin wrote:
I still think we should be pinning runtime-spec 1. |
@wking Updated, PTAL. |
@@ -1,27 +0,0 @@ | |||
// Copyright 2016 The Linux Foundation |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
why this file has been removed? This make the build failed
2.03s$ make test
go test -race -cover github.com/opencontainers/image-tools/cmd/oci-create-runtime-bundle github.com/opencontainers/image-tools/cmd/oci-image-validate github.com/opencontainers/image-tools/cmd/oci-unpack github.com/opencontainers/image-tools/image
# github.com/opencontainers/image-tools/vendor/github.com/opencontainers/image-spec/specs-go/v1
vendor/github.com/opencontainers/image-spec/specs-go/v1/manifest.go:25: undefined: Descriptor
vendor/github.com/opencontainers/image-spec/specs-go/v1/manifest.go:28: undefined: Descriptor
make: *** [test] Error 2
The command "make test" exited with 2.
1.61s$ make tools
go build -ldflags "-X main.gitCommit=c8f837309b85f9ef9d039beb3fcb6e09a9ce88f1" ./cmd/oci-create-runtime-bundle
# github.com/opencontainers/image-tools/vendor/github.com/opencontainers/image-spec/specs-go/v1
vendor/github.com/opencontainers/image-spec/specs-go/v1/manifest.go:25: undefined: Descriptor
vendor/github.com/opencontainers/image-spec/specs-go/v1/manifest.go:28: undefined: Descriptor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Has moved to opencontainers/image-spec/blob/master/specs-go/v1/descriptor.go
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
# make test
go test -race -cover github.com/opencontainers/image-tools/cmd/oci-create-runtime-bundle github.com/opencontainers/image-tools/cmd/oci-image-validate github.com/opencontainers/image-tools/cmd/oci-unpack github.com/opencontainers/image-tools/image
? github.com/opencontainers/image-tools/cmd/oci-create-runtime-bundle [no test files]
? github.com/opencontainers/image-tools/cmd/oci-image-validate [no test files]
? github.com/opencontainers/image-tools/cmd/oci-unpack [no test files]
ok github.com/opencontainers/image-tools/image 1.074s coverage: 32.9% of statements
It's OK for me.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think it's because your run make update-deps
and forget to git add vendor/github.com/opencontainers/image-spec/specs-go/v1/descriptor.go
,
descriptor.go
was in vendor/github.com/opencontainers/image-spec/specs-go
before bumping.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks, I have fixed it:)
bb6e16d
to
0bb57af
Compare
@@ -108,7 +108,7 @@ func TestUnpackLayer(t *testing.T) { | |||
|
|||
testManifest := manifest{ | |||
Layers: []descriptor{descriptor{ | |||
MediaType: "application/vnd.oci.image.layer.tar+gzip", | |||
MediaType: "application/vnd.oci.image.layer.v1.tar+gzip", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think you're missing another one of these on line 172:
$ git grep -n vnd.oci.image.layer.tar origin/pr/69
origin/pr/69:image/manifest_test.go:172: MediaType: "application/vnd.oci.image.layer.tar+gzip",
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks, Updated:)
a4857bc looks good to me :).
|
Look good to me |
lgtm :) |
Can we merge it then? Everything is broken at the moment with this PR not merged (namely |
LGTM we could merge this. |
LGTM |
Aren't @coolljt0725 and @xiekeyang maintainers? @caniszczyk PullApprove is broken (again). |
@xiekeyang @coolljt0725 hi, can you merge this pr ? |
On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 12:41:54AM -0800, Sn0rt wrote:
Neither were maintainers when this PR was last bumped [1,2], so I |
`v1.MediaTypeImageLayer` in latest image-spec has changed, need to be bumped up to the latest version. This commit is only focused on bumping the vendored image-spec and runtime-spec to v1.0.0-rc2. `cobra` and `pflag` doesn't tag releases, so I'm pinning this at our currently-vendored commit. I'm not aware of any reason we can't advance this to a later pflag commit, but haven't done enough research to say for sure. Signed-off-by: Ye Yin <eyniy@qq.com>
@coolljt0725 rebased and force-pushed, PTAL. |
Doesn't seem to have helped. Maybe PullApprove freezes the approver set at PR creation? @caniszczyk? |
Screw this. @coolljt0725 @xiekeyang Can one of you please just manually merge it and push it? Just do:
|
@cyphar manually merge failed
it still need pullapprove |
Dammit. Yeah, it looks like GitHub only lets you do manual merges if the PR has all protection checks passing. This is just getting silly now... |
Maybe an admin can kick PullApprove as described in dropseed/pullapprove-support#33. |
PullApprove works :) |
@coolljt0725 @xiekeyang sorry for the delay on looking at this, was busy with KubeCon :) |
@caniszczyk thank you :) |
Yay! |
v1.MediaTypeImageLayer in latest image-spec has changed, need to be bumped up to the latest version.
This commit is only focused on bumping the vendored image-spec and runtime-spec to v1.0.0-rc2.
cobra
andpflag
doesn't tag releases, so I'm pinning this at our currently-vendored commit. I'm not aware of any reason we can't advance this to a later pflag commit, but haven't done enough research to say for sure.Signed-off-by: Ye Yin eyniy@qq.com