Skip to content

Update mux rules to allow slashes in image names#5235

Merged
openshift-merge-robot merged 1 commit intocontainers:masterfrom
jwhonce:issues/5229
Feb 18, 2020
Merged

Update mux rules to allow slashes in image names#5235
openshift-merge-robot merged 1 commit intocontainers:masterfrom
jwhonce:issues/5229

Conversation

@jwhonce
Copy link
Member

@jwhonce jwhonce commented Feb 17, 2020

%2F escaping is also supported.

Fixes #5229
Fixes #5228

Signed-off-by: Jhon Honce [email protected]

@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Collaborator

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: jwhonce

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

The pull request process is described 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

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. size/M labels Feb 17, 2020
@jwhonce jwhonce self-assigned this Feb 17, 2020
@jwhonce jwhonce requested a review from baude February 17, 2020 18:01
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

looks like a good fix, but not really related to the slash fix right? I'd prefer a second PR for historicla purposes, but shrug.

@TomSweeneyRedHat
Copy link
Member

docs test is failing.

@mheon
Copy link
Member

mheon commented Feb 17, 2020

LGTM once things go green

@rhatdan
Copy link
Member

rhatdan commented Feb 17, 2020

/lgtm
/hold

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. labels Feb 17, 2020
@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot removed the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Feb 17, 2020
@rh-atomic-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #5158) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts.

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Feb 18, 2020
@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot removed the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Feb 18, 2020
%2F escaping is also supported.
Return better response on bad search terms

Fixes containers#5229

Signed-off-by: Jhon Honce <[email protected]>
@mheon
Copy link
Member

mheon commented Feb 18, 2020

/lgtm
/hold cancel

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. and removed do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. labels Feb 18, 2020
@openshift-merge-robot openshift-merge-robot merged commit a5d5596 into containers:master Feb 18, 2020
edsantiago added a commit to edsantiago/libpod that referenced this pull request Feb 19, 2020
PR containers#5235 updated a bunch of entrypoints from {name} to {name:.*},
requiring matching changes to swagger comments. Looks like one
got missed due to the manual nature of this work.

Have I mentioned lately that manual maintenance of duplicate
information is not a great idea?

Discrepancy caught by my script, which I would really like to
look into getting into CI, but is gating on containers#5238. (I would
actually not like to get this script into CI, I would prefer
to have the duplicate information be autogenerated from
the function calls themselves, but I seem to have lost
that battle)

Signed-off-by: Ed Santiago <[email protected]>
snj33v pushed a commit to snj33v/libpod that referenced this pull request May 31, 2020
PR containers#5235 updated a bunch of entrypoints from {name} to {name:.*},
requiring matching changes to swagger comments. Looks like one
got missed due to the manual nature of this work.

Have I mentioned lately that manual maintenance of duplicate
information is not a great idea?

Discrepancy caught by my script, which I would really like to
look into getting into CI, but is gating on containers#5238. (I would
actually not like to get this script into CI, I would prefer
to have the duplicate information be autogenerated from
the function calls themselves, but I seem to have lost
that battle)

Signed-off-by: Ed Santiago <[email protected]>
@jwhonce jwhonce deleted the issues/5229 branch June 30, 2021 16:11
@github-actions github-actions bot added the locked - please file new issue/PR Assist humans wanting to comment on an old issue or PR with locked comments. label Sep 23, 2023
@github-actions github-actions bot locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Sep 23, 2023
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.

Labels

approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. locked - please file new issue/PR Assist humans wanting to comment on an old issue or PR with locked comments.

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

APIv2: querying images containing slashes does not work APIv2: When /images/search fails do not return null

7 participants