Avoid duplication in dockerImageDestionation.{Has,Put}Blob #202
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
mtrmac
force-pushed
the
docker-HasBlob
branch
from
c7c7bb5 to
ae75deb
Compare
giuseppe
pushed a commit
to giuseppe/image
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 24, 2017
Change atomic URI
mtrmac
force-pushed
the
docker-HasBlob
branch
from
ae75deb to
9700986
Compare
Collaborator
Author
|
@runcom PTAL |
Member
|
👍 sounds good to me, @nalind? |
mtrmac
force-pushed
the
docker-HasBlob
branch
3 times, most recently
from
10c34b0 to
ce8c214
Compare
mtrmac
force-pushed
the
docker-HasBlob
branch
from
ce8c214 to
6fe3c01
Compare
mtrmac
force-pushed
the
docker-HasBlob
branch
from
6fe3c01 to
8415f9c
Compare
The code originates in PutBlob, where unexpected HTTP statuses made us abort and not even try to upload; so, it seems that HasBlob should similarly return an error (possibly causing the caller to abort) similarly. The caller can of course still decide to ignore unexpected errors, but this is not an “all is well, blob has not been uploaded” situation (or at least we have been happy enough not to treat it as such a situation in PutBlob so far). Signed-off-by: Miloslav Trmač <[email protected]>
… so that we only have one copy of the code. Signed-off-by: Miloslav Trmač <[email protected]>
Collaborator
Author
|
👍 No response from @nalind in a month, merging. |
lucab
added a commit
to lucab/image
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 28, 2017
After PR containers#202, PutBlob() now goes through an initial HasBlob() which may require authentication in order to perform the check; in such case a push-only scoped token will fail with: ``` service="registry.docker.io",scope="repository:<name>:pull",error="insufficient_scope" ``` This fixes the above case by changing the scope of the token requested for uploads, allowing pull+push. Signed-off-by: Luca Bruno <[email protected]>
lucab
added a commit
to lucab/image
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 28, 2017
After PR containers#202, PutBlob() now goes through an initial HasBlob() which may require authentication in order to perform the check; in such case a push-only scoped token will fail with: ``` service="registry.docker.io",scope="repository:<name>:pull",error="insufficient_scope" ``` This fixes the above case by changing the scope of the token requested for uploads, allowing pull+push. Signed-off-by: Luca Bruno <[email protected]>
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Call
HasBlobindockerImageDestination.PutBlobso that we only have one copy of the code.Note that the first commit of this modifies
HasBlobto fail on unexpected HTTP response statuses, instead of returning “blob not present”; this was modified in #63 but there hasn’t been an explicit explianation why, and right now, with the code duplicated,PutBlobis using its own implementation which aborts on such statuses, so AFAICT the change was either unintentional or ineffective. @nalind ?