Added support for 'cachefrom' when building an image

[llowrey]

Fixes #1132 :This is my initial attempt. I'm not sure how to test it so this effort is incomplete. This PR relates to issue

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #1139 into master will decrease coverage by 0.04%.
The diff coverage is 26.66%.

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##             master    #1139      +/-   ##
============================================
- Coverage     52.29%   52.25%   -0.05%     
- Complexity     1472     1474       +2     
============================================
  Files           150      150              
  Lines          7852     7866      +14     
  Branches       1168     1171       +3     
============================================
+ Hits           4106     4110       +4     
- Misses         3347     3355       +8     
- Partials        399      401       +2

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ	Complexity Δ
...8/maven/docker/config/BuildImageConfiguration.java	78.48% <10%> (-3.73%)	61 <1> (+1)
.../io/fabric8/maven/docker/service/BuildService.java	32.03% <100%> (+0.53%)	9 <0> (ø)	⬇️
...a/io/fabric8/maven/docker/access/BuildOptions.java	91.3% <50%> (-8.7%)	15 <1> (+1)

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #1139 into master will decrease coverage by 0.04%.
The diff coverage is 26.66%.

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##             master    #1139      +/-   ##
============================================
- Coverage     52.29%   52.25%   -0.05%     
- Complexity     1472     1474       +2     
============================================
  Files           150      150              
  Lines          7852     7866      +14     
  Branches       1168     1171       +3     
============================================
+ Hits           4106     4110       +4     
- Misses         3347     3355       +8     
- Partials        399      401       +2

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ	Complexity Δ
...8/maven/docker/config/BuildImageConfiguration.java	78.48% <10%> (-3.73%)	61 <1> (+1)
.../io/fabric8/maven/docker/service/BuildService.java	32.03% <100%> (+0.53%)	9 <0> (ø)	⬇️
...a/io/fabric8/maven/docker/access/BuildOptions.java	91.3% <50%> (-8.7%)	15 <1> (+1)

[rhuss]

Thanks for the PR ! To complete it, I'd recommend:

• Add a test method to BuildConfigTest to ensure that the generated JSON is as you expect
• Add to the build options in the docs
• Add an entry in doc/changelog.md

We don't have really any integration tests, so its ok to have only this unit test.

I'm planning to make a release this evening (CET), so we could still include this PR if you have time to implement that parts today.

thanks !

[rohanKanojia]

@llowrey : Is this till a WIP?

[llowrey]

This should be done. I had made the changes requested by @rhuss.

[rohanKanojia]

@llowrey: ah, okay. Adding WIP label then

[rohanKanojia]

@llowrey : Polite ping, still working on this patch? We're preparing to release and I would like to have this in. Could you please find time to update this? Otherwise we would update it whenever we get time.

[llowrey]

This should have been done as of my commit on Dec-14. Is there something else I need to do?

[rohanKanojia]

@llowrey : oh, sorry. I misunderstood your previous statement. Removing WIP then

[rhuss]

Thank for the PR ! Could you please add the new property also to PropertyHandler and PropertyHandlerTest ? I.e. for usage als properties. Also, the documentation needs to be updated here.

[llowrey]

Unfortunately, I do not have any more time to put toward this so I am abandoning this PR. Sorry for the bother and thank you for considering it.

[rohanKanojia]

@llowrey : ah, It's okay someone else can pick this up. It's pretty much done, right? What are things that need to be fixed in order to get this merged?

[rhuss]

@rohanKanojia actually I think its only the integration into the PropertyHandler (including a test). Otherwise the PR looks good to me.

[llowrey]

@rohanKanojia: I don't know. @rhuss mentioned PropertyHandler and PropertyHandlerTest but I couldn't figure out what to do after poking around for a few minutes. I'm just not familiar enough with the whole codebase to know what else needs to be done. The feature works, at least in my use case. It seems what remains is to do whatever else is required for it to be properly integrated into the codebase.

[rhuss]

@llowrey no worries we can pick that up, if this is ok for you.

[rhuss]

@llowrey thanks for the PR btw, really appreciated !

[rhuss]

Thanks ! lgtm.