Conversation
Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 22098416056Warning: This coverage report may be inaccurate.This pull request's base commit is no longer the HEAD commit of its target branch. This means it includes changes from outside the original pull request, including, potentially, unrelated coverage changes.
Details
💛 - Coveralls |
e1ea57b to
aa28656
Compare
7138b63 to
53826e7
Compare
Relatively, yes.
The issue is that we're installing the |
I see. Complex, real-world CI has so many moving targets. |
53826e7 to
6b16765
Compare
Looking into this a bit more deeply, I think it's related to the package posting for https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:2786 it seems as if the |
This change adds a modifier.Factory that allows the options required for constructing OCI spec modifiers to be encapsulated in a single type instead of requiring that these be passed to every factory function. Signed-off-by: Evan Lezar <elezar@nvidia.com>
Signed-off-by: Evan Lezar <elezar@nvidia.com>
This change ensures that we expose the minimum public API from the modifier package. Signed-off-by: Evan Lezar <elezar@nvidia.com>
This change ensures that a modifier Factory also implements the SpecModifier interface. Signed-off-by: Evan Lezar <elezar@nvidia.com>
6b16765 to
0e4ac09
Compare
This change refactors modifier construction. It adds a
Factorytype which is used to encapsulate modifier construction. This means that it is not required to pass the same arguments (e.g.logger,driver, etc.) to each function for creating a specific modifier.