You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
As issue #10374 has been closed following PR merge #10519, when looking PR code, only shared_image_versions datasource has been fixed to return all images versions following pagination. And when looking at shared_image_version datasource code, the call done in obtainImage function is still the same that was raising error when searching for "latest" or "recent" image when there is more than 50 versions of an image, so not following pagination.
Can a fix similar to what has been done for shared_image_versions datasource be applied to shared_image_version datasource in order to correct the bug indicated in #10374 ?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Thanks for opening this issue. This was a problem in the 2.x version of the provider which is no longer actively maintained.
If this is still an issue with the 3.x version of the provider please do let us know by opening a new issue, thanks!
I'm going to lock this issue because it has been closed for 30 days ⏳. This helps our maintainers find and focus on the active issues.
If you have found a problem that seems similar to this, please open a new issue and complete the issue template so we can capture all the details necessary to investigate further.
As issue #10374 has been closed following PR merge #10519, when looking PR code, only shared_image_versions datasource has been fixed to return all images versions following pagination. And when looking at shared_image_version datasource code, the call done in obtainImage function is still the same that was raising error when searching for "latest" or "recent" image when there is more than 50 versions of an image, so not following pagination.
Can a fix similar to what has been done for shared_image_versions datasource be applied to shared_image_version datasource in order to correct the bug indicated in #10374 ?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: