show extensions when pack inspect #1611
Conversation
github-actions
bot
added
the
type/enhancement
itsdarshankumar
force-pushed
the
pack-inspect
branch
from
6487a7a to
7fd3894
Compare
Codecov Report
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #1611 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 80.58% 80.63% +0.05%
==========================================
Files 156 156
Lines 10544 10508 -36
==========================================
- Hits 8496 8472 -24
+ Misses 1542 1534 -8
+ Partials 506 502 -4
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. |
itsdarshankumar
force-pushed
the
pack-inspect
branch
14 times, most recently
from
6fe8e77 to
d96f28e
Compare
internal/inspectimage/bom_display.go
Outdated
| type BOMEntryDisplay struct { | ||
| Name string `toml:"name" json:"name" yaml:"name"` | ||
| Version string `toml:"version,omitempty" json:"version,omitempty" yaml:"version,omitempty"` | ||
| Metadata map[string]interface{} `toml:"metadata" json:"metadata" yaml:"metadata"` | ||
| Buildpack dist.ModuleRef `json:"buildpacks" yaml:"buildpacks" toml:"buildpacks"` | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| type BOMEntryWithExtensionDisplay struct { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I have the feeling that this should name BOMEntryWithExtension? I mean, a Display contains entries of this struct, right?
internal/inspectimage/bom_display.go
Outdated
| @@ -48,3 +70,31 @@ func displayBOM(bom []buildpack.BOMEntry) []BOMEntryDisplay { | |||
|
|
|||
| return result | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| func displayBOMWithExtension(bom []buildpack.BOMEntry) []BOMEntryWithExtensionDisplay { | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Based on my previous comment, if the struct name is changed to BOMEntryWithExtension then the method's name make sense to what is returning.
| if info == nil { | ||
| return nil | ||
| return nil, &InfoWithExtensionDisplay{ |
|
|
||
| // List of extensions that passed detection, ran their generate | ||
| // phases and made a contribution to this image. | ||
| Extensions []buildpack.GroupElement |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@itsdarshankumar I have a doubt, which problems did you face if you just add Extensions []buildpack.GroupElement into ImageInfo struct? I mean, it an ImageInfo could have extension, then is this new struct totally necessary? did you face issues trying to print the output in that way? I just want to understand why do we need this new one.
Signed-off-by: Darshan Kumar <itsdarshankumar@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Darshan Kumar <itsdarshankumar@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Darshan Kumar <itsdarshankumar@gmail.com>
itsdarshankumar
force-pushed
the
pack-inspect
branch
2 times, most recently
from
7228bca to
d8f2fe2
Compare
Signed-off-by: Darshan Kumar <itsdarshankumar@gmail.com>
itsdarshankumar
force-pushed
the
pack-inspect
branch
from
d8f2fe2 to
7f3951a
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Nice work @itsdarshankumar.
Thanks a lot for your contributions!
| @@ -19,12 +19,16 @@ type BOMEntryDisplay struct { | |||
| Version string `toml:"version,omitempty" json:"version,omitempty" yaml:"version,omitempty"` | |||
| Metadata map[string]interface{} `toml:"metadata" json:"metadata" yaml:"metadata"` | |||
| Buildpack dist.ModuleRef `json:"buildpacks" yaml:"buildpacks" toml:"buildpacks"` | |||
| Extension dist.ModuleRef `json:"extensions" yaml:"extensions" toml:"extensions"` | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I had the occasion to go back and look at this PR, and actually I don't think this is what we want. A "bom entry" is an outdated concept that only applies to buildpacks. It appears that we're basically just repeating information but under the header "extensions"... (cc @jjbustamante )
Summary
pack insepct command output should include Extensions if extensions were used while building the image
Output
Before
After
Image With Extension:
Image Without Extension:
Related
Resolves #1486