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.

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

tag 1.1.0-rc3 #433

Closed
wants to merge 2 commits into from
Closed

Conversation

jdolitsky
Copy link
Member

@jdolitsky jdolitsky commented Jun 27, 2023

tag

This would mean tagging 79571f3 as v1.1.0-rc3

changes

79571f3 version: bump for release of v1.1.0-rc.3
46cff19 conformance: make references tests part of content discovery workflow (#430)
e0e2768 Vendored image-spec should be private (#429)
215045b Fix delete of empty layer manifest (#428)
657d95d Test pull of manifest pushed by digest (#427)
f49a193 Merge pull request #419 from rogpeppe-contrib/001-no-fail-on-no-report
efe2de0 spec: fix regexp (#426)
a738357 spec: more liberal separator for repository names (#425)
99aba31 conformance: initial commit for refererrers test (#375)
c76f05b conformance: skip check (by default) for zero layers in image manifest (#421)
d729b7a README.md: remove a dead link to chat.opencontainers.org (#422)
a1eadff conformance: check response status before checking location (#420)
135780a Fix incorrect test HTTP method (#331)
73fe777 Conformance: fix inappropriate test HTTP method (#332)
aef0f61 fix: delete manifest before blobs by default (#423)
adeb3ac adds some description for adding dist extensions (#302)
58a1fe9 Merge pull request #417 from sudo-bmitch/pr-release-dev-suffix
caded17 conformance: do not fail on report generation failure
7d2d9ff releases: use +dev as in-development suffix
7fcdf80 Merge pull request #411 from imjasonh/patch-2
09d29b1 Update README.md
57b69b6 Merge pull request #407 from brackendawson/aahtifacts
8e2a64e Remove over-constrained references to manifests
529f2d1 Remove references to artifact manifest and artifact manfiest
efe6bee Merge pull request #403 from vbatts/prep-1.1-rc.2
a3b708a version: roll HEAD back to -dev

diff

v1.1.0-rc2...jdolitsky:distribution-spec:79571f3

votes

@jdolitsky jdolitsky marked this pull request as ready for review June 27, 2023 16:42
Copy link
Member

@vbatts vbatts left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

I like how much of these changes are in the conformance test. 💜

@vbatts
Copy link
Member

vbatts commented Jun 28, 2023

(I just edited the post to include votes. :% s/^.*(\(.*\)).*$/ - [ ] \1/ from vim on the MAINTAINERS file)

Copy link
Contributor

@sudo-bmitch sudo-bmitch left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This gets a NACK from me due to issues I found while working on #437 and #438. When testing against distribution/distribution, I'm getting a 500 while setting up the content discovery tests, which breaks the rest of the tests in that group. It's related to pushing a manifest with schemaVersion: 0 which is invalid according to the image-spec. The full manifest we attempt to push is:

{
        "schemaVersion": 0,
        "config": {
                "mediaType": "application/vnd.nhl.peanut.butter.bagel",
                "digest": "sha256:ee29d2e91da0e5dbf6536f5b369148a83ef59b0ce96e49da65dd6c25eb1fa44f",
                "size": 33,
                "data": null,
                "newUnspecifiedField": null
        },
        "layers": [
                {
                        "mediaType": "application/vnd.oci.empty.v1+json",
                        "digest": "sha256:44136fa355b3678a1146ad16f7e8649e94fb4fc21fe77e8310c060f61caaff8a",
                        "size": 2,
                        "data": null,
                        "newUnspecifiedField": null
                }
        ],
        "subject": {
                "digest": "sha256:96948f59c8ab254644088921ebd9609d2caa0bfe3b9d16eaa1e9cb87113d0a3b",
                "size": 671,
                "data": null,
                "newUnspecifiedField": null
        }
}

This should be fixed by #437 and I believe that needs to be included in the RC. I haven't finished reviewing the spec, so it's possible I'll find other issues.

@jdolitsky
Copy link
Member Author

closing in favor of #440

@jdolitsky jdolitsky closed this Jul 6, 2023
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.

6 participants