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

fix(request.json): version with subpath #2136

Conversation

MartinBasti
Copy link
Contributor

We cannot realibly determine if dependency was vendored from SBOM metdata. Keep it safe and export version including git od download URL with subpath.

Maintainers will complete the following section

  • Commit messages are descriptive enough
  • Code coverage from testing does not decrease and new code is covered
  • Python type annotations added to new code
  • JSON/YAML configuration changes are updated in the relevant schema
  • Changes to metadata also update the documentation for the metadata
  • Pull request has a link to an osbs-docs PR for user documentation updates
  • New feature can be disabled from a configuration file

Copy link
Contributor

@chmeliik chmeliik left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM assuming the ruby filepath format is the same as in Cachito

atomic_reactor/utils/cachi2.py Show resolved Hide resolved
We cannot realibly determine if dependency was vendored from SBOM
metdata. Keep it safe and export version including git od download URL
with subpath.

Signed-off-by: Martin Basti <mbasti@redhat.com>
@MartinBasti MartinBasti force-pushed the fix-rubygems-version-request.json branch from ead1df0 to 7018bb7 Compare December 3, 2024 17:11
@MartinBasti
Copy link
Contributor Author

rebased

Copy link
Member

@ben-alkov ben-alkov left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM 🌮

@MartinBasti MartinBasti merged commit d91453c into containerbuildsystem:feature_cachi2 Dec 4, 2024
14 of 15 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