support the new docker build --pull option #1191
Conversation
rohanKanojia
force-pushed
the
pullReq626
branch
2 times, most recently
from
1b3fda9
to
b6bb1af
Compare
| @@ -81,6 +81,9 @@ A provided `<from>` takes precedence over the name given here. This tag is usefu | |||
| | *maintainer* | |||
| | The author (`MAINTAINER`) field for the generated image | |||
|
|
|||
| | *pull* | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
could you please check, I think the entries are alphabetically order in the table.
|
@rohanKanojia not sure what the status of this PR is ? Should we close is ? Looks like it got out-of-sync quite a bit. |
|
Let me check it on Monday, If updating it is painful, then I would close this. Otherwise I would try to modify it to accomodate that |
|
@rohanKanojia no worries, I probably don't have a chance to work on dmp before my holidays. So take your time ;-) |
rohanKanojia
force-pushed
the
pullReq626
branch
from
58abffd
to
5a4969e
Compare
| return buildConfig.getAutoPull().equalsIgnoreCase("TRUE") ? | ||
| ImagePullPolicy.IfNotPresent.name() : | ||
| ImagePullPolicy.Never.name(); | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It was a long time ago, but what actually why do we need both imagePullPolicy and autoPull as properties ? It looks like they are really doing the same and autoPull could always be interfered from an imagePullPolicy.
| @@ -137,6 +137,7 @@ protected void buildImage(ImageConfiguration imageConfig, MojoParameters params, | |||
| // auto is now supported by docker, consider switching? | |||
| BuildOptions opts = | |||
| new BuildOptions(buildConfig.getBuildOptions()) | |||
| .autoPull(buildConfig.getAutoPull()) | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Here we could put in the value calculated from image pull policy ?
rohanKanojia
force-pushed
the
pullReq626
branch
from
5a4969e
to
d47c454
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks, the PR makes totally sense, but I'm still wondering why we just can use the pullPolicy every instead of having an additional autoPull. Historically autoPull was first but IMO serve the same purpose than imagePullPolicy. So instead of introducing yet another autoPull field maybe we should just ensure that imagePullPolicy works properly on the BuildConfiguration ?
But maybe I misunderstood something and autoPull is required in addition to imagePullPolicy.
Extension of PR: #626