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

use a simpler prompt implementation when we lack a terminal #10144

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jan 9, 2023

Conversation

ndeloof
Copy link
Contributor

@ndeloof ndeloof commented Jan 6, 2023

What I did
When stdin is not a terminal, use a simpler Prompt implementation to collect and parse user confirmation

make the survey implementation to rely on dockercli.In() on Out() streams - unfortunately, not using Fd() but FD() as func name, so need an adapter

Related issue
closes #9739

(not mandatory) A picture of a cute animal, if possible in relation to what you did
image

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jan 6, 2023

Codecov Report

Base: 73.89% // Head: 73.89% // No change to project coverage 👍

Coverage data is based on head (e53ae25) compared to base (96bbda9).
Patch has no changes to coverable lines.

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##               v2   #10144   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   73.89%   73.89%           
=======================================
  Files           2        2           
  Lines         272      272           
=======================================
  Hits          201      201           
  Misses         60       60           
  Partials       11       11           

Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here.

☔ View full report at Codecov.
📢 Do you have feedback about the report comment? Let us know in this issue.

@ndeloof ndeloof requested review from a team, nicksieger, StefanScherer, ulyssessouza, glours, milas and laurazard and removed request for a team January 6, 2023 14:12
Copy link
Member

@nicksieger nicksieger left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

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.

Removing a container with piped yes causes a panic runtime error
2 participants