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

requirements: bump craft-providers #1219

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Aug 22, 2023
Merged

requirements: bump craft-providers #1219

merged 3 commits into from
Aug 22, 2023

Conversation

mr-cal
Copy link
Contributor

@mr-cal mr-cal commented Aug 16, 2023

Changelog

1.15.0 (2023-08-21)

  • Update base compatibility tag from base-v1 to base-v2
  • Use snap refresh --hold inside instances
  • Re-level log messages
  • Add more info-level log messages
  • Update links from linuxcontainers.org to ubuntu.com
  • Set timezone of LXD instances to match host's timezone
  • Add name and install recommendations to Providers

Resolves #1202
(CRAFT-1953)

@mr-cal mr-cal marked this pull request as draft August 16, 2023 20:46
@mr-cal mr-cal force-pushed the craft-providers-1.15.0 branch 3 times, most recently from b7f3ea3 to 1892616 Compare August 17, 2023 17:57
Signed-off-by: Callahan Kovacs <[email protected]>
@mr-cal mr-cal changed the title (DRAFT) requirements: bump craft-providers requirements: bump craft-providers Aug 22, 2023
@mr-cal mr-cal marked this pull request as ready for review August 22, 2023 16:45
@mr-cal mr-cal requested review from syu-w and lengau August 22, 2023 17:13
Copy link
Collaborator

@lengau lengau left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM — can you leave it for me to merge? There's a fairly long merge queue that I'm trying to get through 🙂

@syu-w
Copy link
Contributor

syu-w commented Aug 22, 2023

Why there is a test in the bump

@mr-cal
Copy link
Contributor Author

mr-cal commented Aug 22, 2023

Why there is a test in the bump

To confirm the new craft-providers library is working as-expected (sergio's idea from pulse planning). I would be fine to split it into 2 separate commits to be pedantic.

@syu-w
Copy link
Contributor

syu-w commented Aug 22, 2023

Why there is a test in the bump

To confirm the new craft-providers library is working as-expected (sergio's idea from pulse planning). I would be fine to split it into 2 separate commits to be pedantic.

That's fine, but we should have multiple tests doing charmcraft init already?

@mr-cal
Copy link
Contributor Author

mr-cal commented Aug 22, 2023

Why there is a test in the bump

To confirm the new craft-providers library is working as-expected (sergio's idea from pulse planning). I would be fine to split it into 2 separate commits to be pedantic.

That's fine, but we should have multiple tests doing charmcraft init already?

Can you explain what you mean? I think it is OK for many spread tests to use charmcraft init but test different components of charmcraft's behavior.

@syu-w
Copy link
Contributor

syu-w commented Aug 22, 2023

Why there is a test in the bump

To confirm the new craft-providers library is working as-expected (sergio's idea from pulse planning). I would be fine to split it into 2 separate commits to be pedantic.

That's fine, but we should have multiple tests doing charmcraft init already?

Can you explain what you mean? I think it is OK for many spread tests to use charmcraft init but test different components of charmcraft's behavior.

I mean it is OK to have specialized test for LXD. I was thinking we have multiple tests doing that charmcraft init in LXD already.

@lengau lengau merged commit b76d96a into main Aug 22, 2023
24 of 25 checks passed
@lengau lengau deleted the craft-providers-1.15.0 branch August 22, 2023 18:43
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.

charmcraft installs newer version in LXC container & doesn't respect pinned snap revision
3 participants