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

schema: fix items based on latest spec #655

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jan 18, 2017

Conversation

Mashimiao
Copy link

Signed-off-by: Ma Shimiao mashimiao.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com

Signed-off-by: Ma Shimiao <mashimiao.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>
@dqminh
Copy link
Contributor

dqminh commented Jan 13, 2017

LGTM

Approved with PullApprove

Copy link
Contributor

@wking wking left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The same “we probably don't want to allow explicit null” applies to UID and GID too, and probably a bunch of other settings in the JSON Schema as well. I'm fine addressing this in a follow-up PR if you don't want to handle it here.

@@ -245,6 +245,10 @@
"id": "https://opencontainers.org/schema/bundle/linux/resources/memory/kernel",
"$ref": "defs.json#/definitions/int64Pointer"
},
"kernelTCP": {
"id": "https://opencontainers.org/schema/bundle/linux/resources/memory/kernelTCP",
"$ref": "defs.json#/definitions/int64Pointer"
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We definitely need a kernelTCP entry (catching up with #235), but after #555 I'm not sure we want to use pointers here. The optional-ness is represented in JSON Schema by not listing these properties in a required array; we don't have to (or want to?) allow people to explicitly set a null value.

@RobDolinMS RobDolinMS added this to the 1.0.0 milestone Jan 18, 2017
@mrunalp
Copy link
Contributor

mrunalp commented Jan 18, 2017

LGTM

Approved with PullApprove

@RobDolinMS
Copy link
Collaborator

@wking Can your comment be addressed in a separate PR?

@vbatts
Copy link
Member

vbatts commented Jan 18, 2017

LGTM

Approved with PullApprove

@vbatts vbatts merged commit dc0fa75 into opencontainers:master Jan 18, 2017
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.

6 participants