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

Fix serverImage example in README #579

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

Fix serverImage example in README #579

wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

apa64
Copy link

@apa64 apa64 commented Oct 9, 2023

What this PR does:
Fixes serverImage example in README to have @sha256 when referencing an image ID.

Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
N/A

Checklist

  • Changes manually tested
  • Automated Tests added/updated
  • Documentation added/updated
  • CHANGELOG.md updated (not required for documentation PRs)
  • CLA Signed: DataStax CLA

Fixes serverImage example in README to have `@sha256` when referencing an image ID.

Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
N/A

Checklist

- [x] Changes manually tested
- [ ] Automated Tests added/updated
- [x] Documentation added/updated
- [ ] CHANGELOG.md updated (not required for documentation PRs)
- [ ] CLA Signed: DataStax CLA
@apa64 apa64 requested a review from a team as a code owner October 9, 2023 07:24
@github-actions
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Oct 9, 2023

No linked issues found. Please add the corresponding issues in the pull request description.
Use GitHub automation to close the issue when a PR is merged

@burmanm
Copy link
Contributor

burmanm commented Oct 9, 2023

We don't require SHA256 to be used in the ServerImage field, that would be up to the user. Only our OLM installation uses that method.

@apa64
Copy link
Author

apa64 commented Oct 9, 2023

Oh! I misunderstood how it works - thank you! I'll cancel this PR as invalid.

@apa64
Copy link
Author

apa64 commented Oct 9, 2023

Closed as invalid, do not merge.

@apa64 apa64 closed this Oct 9, 2023
@apa64 apa64 deleted the readme-serverimage branch October 9, 2023 07:31
@burmanm
Copy link
Contributor

burmanm commented Oct 9, 2023

To clarify, there's nothing wrong if you wish to use SHA256s, that's fine. But some users prefer to use the tagged versions, given that they could get updated base-images (such as CVE fixes like the upcoming curl one) that way automatically, while using SHA256 images would prevent that and require manually updating the manifests.

Both methods have their own pros/cons. But for examples, I'd prefer to keep it as simple tagged ones to ensure users always have the newest base image.

@apa64
Copy link
Author

apa64 commented Oct 9, 2023

We encountered an issue with our private registry (working as pull-through cache): the cluster account is not allowed to pull external images to the cache from docker.io automatically. The updated minor version tag made us hit this restriction. I see now that in our case I should specify the ID. Thank you, again :)

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.

2 participants