-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 413
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
add docker.io registry #63
add docker.io registry #63
Conversation
/lgtm |
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: abhinavdahiya, rphillips The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. The pull request process is described here
Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
I'll just continue my quest against this by commenting here: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1434897#c7 |
(Why are we overriding the config files shipped in the RPMs anyways?) |
Oh...this is probably because cri-o doesn't search If that's breaking our code, and we are actually intending to pull containers from docker.io, I think we should explicitly spell that out in the configs. |
@cgwalters end users of containers usually expect docker pull busybox to pull the docker hub busybox. |
(The question of it affecting users is IMO distinct...probably we should have a high level config knob in the installer to affect the registry search order)
Right, but we're not shipping |
Completely agree and we are working to find all those places. We know the router, registry, and webconsole currently do not fully qualify their image paths. Ideally we get to a world where the search list is empty and everyone fully qualifies their image paths. |
Backing up my claim https://github.com/coreos-inc/tectonic-operators/pull/463 |
remove configmap and move its contents into SamplesResource.Status
Enables docker.io registries