Skip to content

Comments

Split pkg/idtools#33482

Closed
vieux wants to merge 1 commit intomoby:masterfrom
vieux:split_idtools
Closed

Split pkg/idtools#33482
vieux wants to merge 1 commit intomoby:masterfrom
vieux:split_idtools

Conversation

@vieux
Copy link
Contributor

@vieux vieux commented Jun 2, 2017

See #32989

Split "github.com/docker/docker/pkg/idtools between github.com/docker/docker/pkg/fsutils1 and github.com/docker/docker/pkg/system`

@vieux vieux requested a review from dnephin June 2, 2017 00:30
@vieux vieux mentioned this pull request Jun 2, 2017
79 tasks
@AkihiroSuda AkihiroSuda added the status/failing-ci Indicates that the PR in its current state fails the test suite label Jun 2, 2017
@vieux vieux added status/2-code-review and removed status/0-triage status/failing-ci Indicates that the PR in its current state fails the test suite labels Jun 2, 2017
@dnephin
Copy link
Member

dnephin commented Jun 2, 2017

This is going to conflict heavily with #33362. I hope we can merge that first. It's a more involved change. Sorry I should have put that into the tracking issue.

@vieux
Copy link
Contributor Author

vieux commented Jun 2, 2017

@dnephin ok no worries

@thaJeztah
Copy link
Member

ping @vieux - #33362 was merged, so this needs an, erm, rebase or rewrite

@thaJeztah thaJeztah added the status/failing-ci Indicates that the PR in its current state fails the test suite label Jun 13, 2017
@vieux vieux force-pushed the split_idtools branch 3 times, most recently from 505cc18 to 4419045 Compare June 16, 2017 01:01
@vieux vieux removed the status/failing-ci Indicates that the PR in its current state fails the test suite label Jun 16, 2017
@vieux
Copy link
Contributor Author

vieux commented Jun 16, 2017

@dnephin rebased.

Copy link
Member

@thaJeztah thaJeztah left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

spotted one typo

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

s/synlinks/symlinks/

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I don't think we should export this two line helper.

I believe with the suggested split up this won't need to be exported anymore, as the only consumers will be in pkg/system/user

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@dnephin so you would move the whole utils_unix.go to pkg/system/user ?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The file is only these 2 functions, right? so yes I think it would all move to pkg/system/user.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This is the part of the package that I thought would move to pkg/system. It doesn't have much to do with files.

This file could move to pkg/system/user/usergroupadd_linux.go

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This file could move to pkg/system/user/....go

Copy link
Member

@dnephin dnephin Jun 16, 2017

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This file needs to be split up.

LookupX() would go to pkg/system/user/usergroupadd_linux.go

The file stuff can stay in fsutil

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think some of this file needs to be split up.

All the Mkdir... would be fsutils, but the ID stuff probably makes more sense in system/user/

The file stiff can stay in fsutil

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I believe with the suggested split up this won't need to be exported anymore, as the only consumers will be in pkg/system/user

Signed-off-by: Victor Vieux <[email protected]>
@thaJeztah
Copy link
Member

ping @vieux this needs a rebase

@vieux vieux assigned dnephin and unassigned vdemeester Jun 30, 2017
@vieux
Copy link
Contributor Author

vieux commented Jun 30, 2017

@thaJeztah yup, @dnephin will carry the PR, assigning to him.

@thaJeztah
Copy link
Member

ping @dnephin ^^

@dnephin
Copy link
Member

dnephin commented Jul 20, 2017

This seems fairly low priority given the new path for the engine. I'm going to close this PR for now. It's still on my list.

@dnephin dnephin closed this Jul 20, 2017
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants