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 correct [[targets.distros]] schema in RFC 0128 #312

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
May 14, 2024

Conversation

edmorley
Copy link
Contributor

Updates RFC 0128 to use the correct [[targets.distros]] schema as defined already in the spec:
https://github.com/buildpacks/spec/blob/main/buildpack.md#buildpacktoml-toml

I've not added an ## Amended section, since:

  1. The RFC has only just merged (this is effectively a review comment that missed the merge by a day)
  2. The parts of the RFC being fixed are existing concepts already in the spec, rather than design decisions relating to the purpose of the RFC itself.

Fixes #295 (comment).

Updates RFC 0128 to use the correct `[[targets.distros]]` schema as defined
already in the spec:
https://github.com/buildpacks/spec/blob/main/buildpack.md#buildpacktoml-toml

I've not added an `## Amended` section, since:
1. The RFC has only just merged (this is effectively a review comment
   that missed the merge by a day)
2. The parts of the RFC being fixed are existing concepts already in the spec,
   rather than design decisions relating to the purpose of the RFC itself.

Fixes:
buildpacks#295 (comment)
Signed-off-by: Ed Morley <501702+edmorley@users.noreply.github.com>
@buildpack-bot
Copy link
Member

Maintainers,

As you review this RFC please queue up issues to be created using the following commands:

/queue-issue <repo> "<title>" [labels]...
/unqueue-issue <uid>

Issues

(none)

@edmorley edmorley changed the title RFC 0128: Use correct [[targets.distros]] schema Use correct [[targets.distros]] schema in RFC 0128 Apr 11, 2024
@edmorley
Copy link
Contributor Author

@jjbustamante Could I have review? :-)

Copy link
Member

@jjbustamante jjbustamante left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thank you very much @edmorley !!!

@jjbustamante
Copy link
Member

Just to be consistent with the process, I think we should add the Amend section at the bottom

<!--
## Amended
### Meta
[meta-1]: #meta-1
- Name: (fill in the amendment name: Variable Rename)
- Start Date: (fill in today's date: YYYY-MM-DD)
- Author(s): (Github usernames)
- Amendment Pull Request: (leave blank)

### Summary

A brief description of the changes.

### Motivation

Why was this amendment necessary?
--->

@edmorley
Copy link
Contributor Author

Just to be consistent with the process, I think we should add the Amend section at the bottom

I explained why I didn't add this section in the PR description. I still think we shouldn't add one.

@edmorley
Copy link
Contributor Author

Ultimately this is a typo fix to something unrelated to the RFC, not a change in the actual intent of the RFC.

@edmorley
Copy link
Contributor Author

Please can someone merge this?

@natalieparellano natalieparellano merged commit b8b177a into buildpacks:main May 14, 2024
7 checks passed
@edmorley edmorley deleted the rfc-0128-fix-schema branch May 14, 2024 18:17
@edmorley
Copy link
Contributor Author

Thank you :-)

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.

4 participants