Skip to content

Conversation

@rhuss
Copy link
Contributor

@rhuss rhuss commented Jun 4, 2025

No description provided.

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot requested review from cardil and mvinkler June 4, 2025 17:19
@openshift-ci
Copy link

openshift-ci bot commented Jun 4, 2025

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: rhuss
Once this PR has been reviewed and has the lgtm label, please assign openshift-cherrypick-robot for approval. For more information see the Code Review Process.

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

Details Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

func (o Operation) generateImages(rel release) step {
return func() error {
// Check if DockerfileGen configuration is provided
if o.Config.SkipImage {
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Can't we skip based on the o.Config.DockerfileGen not being configured, instead of introducing this flag?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Well, I tried this first. But since it is always initialized with the default values, its never empty. If you an easier idea to do this (maybe with pointers or not using default for DockerfileGen), I'm all ears as I don't like this solution much either.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

True. Thinking...

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Maybe we could create a wrapper struct around dockerfilegen.Params, and add a skip param there. It should still be able to unmarshal, right? Let me check...

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

WDYT about #44 instead?

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.

2 participants