Skip to content

UPSTREAM: openshift/source-to-image: 576: increase default docker tim…#10675

Merged
openshift-bot merged 1 commit intoopenshift:masterfrom
gabemontero:bz1370265
Aug 26, 2016
Merged

UPSTREAM: openshift/source-to-image: 576: increase default docker tim…#10675
openshift-bot merged 1 commit intoopenshift:masterfrom
gabemontero:bz1370265

Conversation

@gabemontero
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

…eout

per hall chat with @bparees , @deads2k, and myself, followed by devexp scrum discussion his AM, this is a s2i upstream merge of the no-risk, bump the default docker timeout, portion of the fix for bugzilla 1370265 that is being driven by s2i pull 576.

This commit passed make verify and hack/verify-upstream-commits.sh

@bparees @csrwng @deads2k PTAL

and of course, if we change our mind and don't want to bother with even this portion of the fix for 3.3, I can nuke this pr.

thanks

@deads2k
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

deads2k commented Aug 26, 2016

[test]

// DefaultDockerTimeout specifies a timeout for Docker API calls. When this
// timeout is reached, certain Docker API calls might error out.
DefaultDockerTimeout = 20 * time.Second
DefaultDockerTimeout = 60 * time.Second
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Wow.

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Evaluated for origin test up to 5820bb8

@bparees
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

bparees commented Aug 26, 2016

@deads2k you ok w/ the commit syntax? we don't actually have an upstream commit to reference because this isn't the exact change we're going to put into s2i.

@gabemontero alternatively we can do a separate PR to s2i to make the timeout change and reference it here, for completeness.

@gabemontero
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

gabemontero commented Aug 26, 2016

I'll refactor the existing s2i pull to only do the timeout change

@deads2k
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

deads2k commented Aug 26, 2016

@deads2k you ok w/ the commit syntax? we don't actually have an upstream commit to reference because this isn't the exact change we're going to put into s2i.

Yes, looks fine.

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

continuous-integration/openshift-jenkins/test SUCCESS (https://ci.openshift.redhat.com/jenkins/job/test_pr_origin/8492/)

@gabemontero
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

gabemontero commented Aug 26, 2016

s2i pull 526 refactored to exactly match this one, and it has merged

@bparees
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

bparees commented Aug 26, 2016

@gabemontero can you change the commit text to reference the actual upstream commit now that there is one?

@gabemontero
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

gabemontero commented Aug 26, 2016

@bparees based on what I read in the scripts/validation code, and looking at recent UPSTREAM examples, you just point to the PR number for these UPSTREAM guys. I think the text is good to go.

@bparees
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

bparees commented Aug 26, 2016

my bad.
lgtm
[merge]

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

openshift-bot commented Aug 26, 2016

continuous-integration/openshift-jenkins/merge SUCCESS (https://ci.openshift.redhat.com/jenkins/job/test_pr_origin/8492/) (Image: devenv-rhel7_4939)

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Evaluated for origin merge up to 5820bb8

@openshift-bot openshift-bot merged commit 356d410 into openshift:master Aug 26, 2016
@gabemontero gabemontero deleted the bz1370265 branch August 29, 2016 12:56
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.

4 participants