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

RFC 138: Add builder to project descriptor #1114

Closed
dfreilich opened this issue Mar 17, 2021 · 4 comments · Fixed by #1116
Closed

RFC 138: Add builder to project descriptor #1114

dfreilich opened this issue Mar 17, 2021 · 4 comments · Fixed by #1116
Labels
good first issue A good first issue to get started with. size/sm Small level of effort status/ready Issue ready to be worked on. type/enhancement Issue that requests a new feature or improvement.

Comments

@dfreilich
Copy link
Member

dfreilich commented Mar 17, 2021

Implement buildpacks/rfcs#138

Summary

Add a builder key to the project.toml file, under build

Since a builder can be selected multiple ways, the following defines the order of precedence when selecting a builder:

  1. --builder flag (highest precedence)
  2. project.tomluild.builder
  3. configured builder (set via pack config default-builder)

project.toml spec

[project]
id = "<string>"

[build]
builder = "<string>" # optional
@dfreilich dfreilich added type/enhancement Issue that requests a new feature or improvement. status/triage Issue or PR that requires contributor attention. and removed status/triage Issue or PR that requires contributor attention. labels Mar 17, 2021
@dfreilich dfreilich changed the title RFC: Add builder to project descriptor RFC 138: Add builder to project descriptor Mar 17, 2021
@dfreilich dfreilich added good first issue A good first issue to get started with. size/sm Small level of effort status/ready Issue ready to be worked on. and removed status/triage Issue or PR that requires contributor attention. labels Mar 17, 2021
@jromero
Copy link
Member

jromero commented Apr 7, 2021

We might have missed a prerequisite here. This should be dependant on project descriptor spec which hasn't been created.

See buildpacks/spec#215

Overall, I don't think it's a big deal given the minimal impact of an extra field that is being respected but something to look out for in the future for more impactful changes. For example, reverse domain tables #1127. In those cases, we'd definitely would want to look at api field for the project descriptor spec version.

@sambhav
Copy link
Member

sambhav commented Apr 7, 2021

There is a pending PR for the spec changes buildpacks/spec#217

Waiting for that to be reviewed/merged.

@dfreilich
Copy link
Member Author

I would argue that it isn't truly a pre-requisite. We can support features that aren't specified; the project descriptor spec is meant to allow for modification and further features.

@fkaleo
Copy link

fkaleo commented Nov 28, 2021

Documentation work remains: buildpacks/docs#345

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
good first issue A good first issue to get started with. size/sm Small level of effort status/ready Issue ready to be worked on. type/enhancement Issue that requests a new feature or improvement.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

4 participants