Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Pull request overview
This PR fixes a base-only provider-graph validation edge case where inspecting a base image by config ID can yield an internally inconsistent identity (Docker-reported config-ID descriptor vs the originally resolved registry descriptor). The change restores the resolved base descriptor/image identity so downstream validation and application runtime-layer builds remain consistent when no provider layers are present.
Changes:
- In base-only graphs, restore the resolved base
Descriptorand base prefixImageafter inspection to preserve the registry-resolved identity. - Relax inspected-candidate identity validation to accept
Image.Digestmatching either the descriptor’s config digest or (when present) manifest digest. - Update the base-only graph validation test to simulate Docker’s config-ID inspection behavior and assert the resolved descriptor is preserved; add a changelog fragment.
Reviewed changes
Copilot reviewed 4 out of 4 changed files in this pull request and generated no comments.
| File | Description |
|---|---|
| internal/dockerdeploy/provider_graph_validation.go | Restores the resolved base descriptor/image identity for base-only graphs after inspection-by-config-ID. |
| internal/dockerdeploy/provider_graph_validation_test.go | Updates the base-only test to reflect Docker’s config-ID descriptor reporting and asserts the resolved descriptor is preserved. |
| internal/dockerdeploy/materialization_layer.go | Allows inspected identity validation to accept manifest digest matches when a descriptor carries a manifest digest. |
| .changes/unreleased/+base-only-direct-install.yaml | Adds a release-note fragment documenting the fix. |
💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.
e9fe69f to
af3263b
Compare
cc8bf62 to
d2ea9e5
Compare
ba9173d to
640371f
Compare
2a5e37c to
59ee228
Compare
|
@codex review |
![chatgpt-codex-connector[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/1144995?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 1d717aff70
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
|
@codex review |
|
Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. Hooray! Reviewed commit: ℹ️ About Codex in GitHubYour team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍. Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback". |
Stack created with Sapling. Best reviewed with ReviewStack.