oc image mirror was accidentally broken during dependency updating
#18078
Conversation
openshift-ci-robot
added
the
approved
openshift-ci-robot
added
the
size/L
openshift-merge-robot
added
the
vendor-update
|
if we want carries, need to update glide.yaml to indicate we're working off a branch, e.g. and prep that branch so we can track what carries we have applies to 3.8 as well, looks like |
|
Ok, so we've fundamentally changed how our carries work? I didn't get the
memo.
…On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 1:42 PM, Jordan Liggitt ***@***.***> wrote:
if we want carries, need to update glide.yaml to indicate we're working
off a branch
—
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#18078 (comment)>,
or mute the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABG_p6tIEiBaOd5M9RfIUq0HuXcj_2_Qks5tJlYzgaJpZM4RbP6Z>
.
|
|
I also don't see anything related to docker distribution in origin, so I'm
assuming you're letting it just drift in from nested, but we have a carry
that must be there for oc. So it is now an explicit dependency of origin.
On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 1:51 PM, Clayton Coleman <[email protected]>
wrote:
… Ok, so we've fundamentally changed how our carries work? I didn't get the
memo.
On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 1:42 PM, Jordan Liggitt ***@***.***>
wrote:
> if we want carries, need to update glide.yaml to indicate we're working
> off a branch
>
> —
> You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
> Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> <#18078 (comment)>,
> or mute the thread
> <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABG_p6tIEiBaOd5M9RfIUq0HuXcj_2_Qks5tJlYzgaJpZM4RbP6Z>
> .
>
|
Not really... we started pulling from branches of our forks in https://github.com/openshift/origin/pull/9781/files#diff-48b416562714518e8868b6a1859dd433R75 glide.yaml just formalizes that relationship
Right, dropping it in 3.8 was a mistake... I thought it was only for the imageregistry, but that lost us this carry |
|
What's the release branching strategy in our forks now? Cherry-pick on top
of the upstream's branch (release-2.6.2) and push to fork? Or create a new
openshift specific release branch (openshift-3.9?)
…On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 2:00 PM, Jordan Liggitt ***@***.***> wrote:
Ok, so we've fundamentally changed how our carries work?
Not really... we started doing this in https://github.com/openshift/
origin/pull/9781/files#diff-48b416562714518e8868b6a1859dd433R75
I also don't see anything related to docker distribution in origin, so I'm
assuming you're letting it just drift in from nested, but we have a carry
that must be there for oc. So it is now an explicit dependency of origin.
Right, dropping it in 3.8 was a mistake... I thought it was only for the
imageregistry, but that lost us this carry
—
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#18078 (comment)>,
or mute the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABG_p3Aa7bkKiFPMdXrJ8N4SiEgwPpImks5tJlpWgaJpZM4RbP6Z>
.
|
|
@deads2k the PR in question. I need to have a cherry-pick from upstream
(merged already) on top of docker-distribution fork.
1. what branch in openshift/docker-distribution should it be on
(release-2.6.2 or openshift-3.9)
2. i'm ok with adding to glide directly (already merged to upstream)
3. i can also just merge this and then sync out
I just want to know....
On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 2:03 PM, Clayton Coleman <[email protected]>
wrote:
… What's the release branching strategy in our forks now? Cherry-pick on
top of the upstream's branch (release-2.6.2) and push to fork? Or create a
new openshift specific release branch (openshift-3.9?)
On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 2:00 PM, Jordan Liggitt ***@***.***>
wrote:
> Ok, so we've fundamentally changed how our carries work?
>
> Not really... we started doing this in https://github.com/openshift/o
> rigin/pull/9781/files#diff-48b416562714518e8868b6a1859dd433R75
>
> I also don't see anything related to docker distribution in origin, so
> I'm assuming you're letting it just drift in from nested, but we have a
> carry that must be there for oc. So it is now an explicit dependency of
> origin.
>
> Right, dropping it in 3.8 was a mistake... I thought it was only for the
> imageregistry, but that lost us this carry
>
> —
> You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
> Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> <#18078 (comment)>,
> or mute the thread
> <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABG_p3Aa7bkKiFPMdXrJ8N4SiEgwPpImks5tJlpWgaJpZM4RbP6Z>
> .
>
|
Requires a new branch now that we have a carry commit
smarterclayton
force-pushed
the
fix_mirror
branch
from
9f643fd
to
729d5f5
Compare
|
/retest Ready for review (has the glide changes requested, release-2.6.0 pushed to openshift/docker-distribution) |
|
thanks, change and prepped branch look good. is it possible to have a test that would catch this if it broke again? |
|
Unfortunately we don't have an easy way to test docker.io support (it works against the openshift registry in the case we could easily test) except by writing to docker.io. I need to add a test against openshift though (e2e) |
|
/lgtm |
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: liggitt, smarterclayton The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.
Needs approval from an approver in each of these OWNERS Files:
You can indicate your approval by writing |
|
Automatic merge from submit-queue. |
An upstream cherry-pick was dropped and the wrong values were passed to the manifest Get call.
@liggitt