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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Upgrade to version 2.2.0 where possible #59

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Jan 16, 2025
Merged

Upgrade to version 2.2.0 where possible #59

merged 4 commits into from
Jan 16, 2025

Conversation

jsf9k
Copy link
Member

@jsf9k jsf9k commented Dec 17, 2024 •
edited
Loading

🗣 Description

This pull request:

💭 Motivation and context

🧪 Testing

All automated tests pass.

✅ Pre-approval checklist

  • This PR has an informative and human-readable title.
  • Changes are limited to a single goal - eschew scope creep!
  • All relevant type-of-change labels have been added.
  • I have read the CONTRIBUTING document.
  • These code changes follow cisagov code standards.
  • All new and existing tests pass.

jsf9k added 3 commits December 17, 2024 09:53
@jsf9k
Upgrade to version 2.2.0 where possible
500974f
@jsf9k
Add dependency that provides envsubst
5638726 
This is a new dependency for version 2.2.0.
@jsf9k
Revert upgrade of Ubuntu platforms to 2.x version
98766a4 
This reverts a change that was made in PR #57.  The Molecule tests
pass with this change, but building an actual AMI with these changes
fails for the reasons stated in issue #53.
@jsf9k jsf9k added bug This issue or pull request addresses broken functionality improvement This issue or pull request will add or improve functionality, maintainability, or ease of use labels Dec 17, 2024
@jsf9k jsf9k self-assigned this Dec 17, 2024
@jsf9k jsf9k force-pushed the improvement/upgrade-to-2.2.0-where-possible branch from 2b8cd9a to 5c1a32f Compare December 17, 2024 21:55
@jsf9k jsf9k force-pushed the improvement/upgrade-to-2.2.0-where-possible branch from 5c1a32f to 98766a4 Compare January 15, 2025 15:07
@jsf9k jsf9k marked this pull request as ready for review January 15, 2025 22:04
@jsf9k jsf9k requested review from dav3r and mcdonnnj as code owners January 15, 2025 22:04
@jsf9k jsf9k requested a review from a team January 15, 2025 22:05
@dv4harr10
Copy link
Contributor

Hi Shane @jsf9k , one question, is there a reason Debian_bookworm.yml version remains 1.36.0? If so, is there a need for a comment explaining why it's not updating to 2.2.0

@jsf9k
Copy link
Member Author

jsf9k commented Jan 16, 2025

Hi Shane @jsf9k , one question, is there a reason Debian_bookworm.yml version remains 1.36.0? If so, is there a need for a comment explaining why it's not updating to 2.2.0

Please see commit 19bb531.

@jsf9k jsf9k merged commit 23a410c into develop Jan 16, 2025
49 of 57 checks passed
@jsf9k jsf9k deleted the improvement/upgrade-to-2.2.0-where-possible branch January 16, 2025 18:56
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@dv4harr10 dv4harr10 dv4harr10 approved these changes

@dav3r dav3r dav3r approved these changes

@mcdonnnj mcdonnnj Awaiting requested review from mcdonnnj mcdonnnj is a code owner

Assignees

@jsf9k jsf9k

Labels
bug This issue or pull request addresses broken functionality improvement This issue or pull request will add or improve functionality, maintainability, or ease of use
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
3 participants
@jsf9k @dv4harr10 @dav3r