-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 515
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
Add compression option to tarball.Layer and stream.Layer #574
Add compression option to tarball.Layer and stream.Layer #574
Conversation
Thanks for your pull request. It looks like this may be your first contribution to a Google open source project (if not, look below for help). Before we can look at your pull request, you'll need to sign a Contributor License Agreement (CLA). 📝 Please visit https://cla.developers.google.com/ to sign. Once you've signed (or fixed any issues), please reply here with What to do if you already signed the CLAIndividual signers
Corporate signers
ℹ️ Googlers: Go here for more info. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
lgtm but I'll wait for @jonjohnsonjr's review to merge
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #574 +/- ##
========================================
+ Coverage 72.95% 73% +0.05%
========================================
Files 99 99
Lines 4411 4420 +9
========================================
+ Hits 3218 3227 +9
Misses 786 786
Partials 407 407
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM in general, a couple small nits.
This only fixes tarball.Layer
and not stream.Layer
-- I'd update the PR description to avoid closing this until we address both (or just fix stream
in this PR as well?).
dbee5a0
to
626937d
Compare
CLAs look good, thanks! ℹ️ Googlers: Go here for more info. |
626937d
to
30d2ead
Compare
Alright, think I've got everything squared away. I've implemented the change to I did notice (and followed) the slightly different testing convention so the tests will look different between them. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Alright, think I've got everything squared away. I've implemented the change to stream.Layer as well to truly resolve the issue mentioned.
I have one small nit on the comments (sorry!), otherwise lgtm. I think we'll eventually want to deprecate this and move to a more general way to augment layer content and media type (see my comment here), but I don't want to block this on trying to design around that :)
I did notice (and followed) the slightly different testing convention so the tests will look different between them.
Yeah it's a bit of a mess.
Signed-off-by: Javier Romero <jromero@pivotal.io>
30d2ead
to
f2b0120
Compare
@jonjohnsonjr I can totally see the need and use case of different compression algorithms but that goes a bit beyond our scope at the moment. I'd be happy to take a swing at it via a different PR. |
Thanks! |
Resolves #572
Signed-off-by: Javier Romero jromero@pivotal.io