-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 106
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(scrub): replace umoci logic in scrub implementation #1845
Conversation
Why do we still have umoci in go.mod? |
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #1845 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 91.99% 92.05% +0.06%
==========================================
Files 146 146
Lines 26462 26465 +3
==========================================
+ Hits 24343 24363 +20
+ Misses 1563 1552 -11
+ Partials 556 550 -6
... and 3 files with indirect coverage changes 📣 We’re building smart automated test selection to slash your CI/CD build times. Learn more |
b8f4d67
to
b2102d6
Compare
- implement scrub also for S3 storage by replacing umoci - change scrub implementation for ImageIndex - take the `Subject` into consideration when running scrub - remove test code relying on the umoci library. Since we started relying on images in test/data, and we create our own images using go code we can obtain digests by other means. (cherry picked from commit 489d4e2) Signed-off-by: Andrei Aaron <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Andreea-Lupu <[email protected]>
b2102d6
to
e25d343
Compare
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.
lgtm
Subject
into consideration when running scrubrelying on images in test/data, and we create our own images using
go code we can obtain digests by other means. (cherry picked from commit andaaron@489d4e2)
What type of PR is this?
Which issue does this PR fix:
#1685 #734
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.