Skip to content
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

refactor: rename 'layer' as 'image' in stacker publish path #583

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jan 12, 2024

Conversation

rchincha
Copy link
Contributor

What type of PR is this?

Which issue does this PR fix:

What does this PR do / Why do we need it:

If an issue # is not available please add repro steps and logs showing the issue:

Testing done on this change:

Automation added to e2e:

Will this break upgrades or downgrades?

Does this PR introduce any user-facing change?:


By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the Apache 2.0 license.

Signed-off-by: Ramkumar Chinchani <rchincha@cisco.com>
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jan 11, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Comparison is base (2152d8d) 57.17% compared to head (96038a0) 57.17%.

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main     #583   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   57.17%   57.17%           
=======================================
  Files          64       64           
  Lines        7521     7521           
=======================================
  Hits         4300     4300           
  Misses       2479     2479           
  Partials      742      742           

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

Copy link
Contributor

@hallyn hallyn left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Seems the right thing to do, but are there any users that will get broken by this?

@mikemccracken
Copy link
Contributor

Seems the right thing to do, but are there any users that will get broken by this?

I am not aware of any in our internal usage, just looked. I think there is a lot of just 'skopeo copy'ing going on in scripts that predate or were ignorant of 'stacker publish'.

@rchincha rchincha merged commit 554db17 into project-stacker:main Jan 12, 2024
11 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants