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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Don't pass default values explicitly to the lifecycle phases #610

Closed
yaelharel opened this issue May 6, 2020 · 2 comments · Fixed by #1067
Closed

Don't pass default values explicitly to the lifecycle phases #610

yaelharel opened this issue May 6, 2020 · 2 comments · Fixed by #1067
Labels
good first issue A good first issue to get started with. status/ready Issue ready to be worked on. type/chore Issue that requests non-user facing changes.

Comments

@yaelharel
Copy link
Contributor

Description

Currently, we're passing the following flags with their default values to the lifecycle phases: -layers, -platform and -app. There is no reason to do so and it can be confusing to the reader.
We would like to stop passing these values explicitly.

Proposed solution

Remove the flags -layers, -platform and -app from the calls to the following lifecycle phases: detect, restore, analyze, build and export (these flags weren't added to the creator call - see this PR).

Additional context

The phases are located here.
A description of the lifecycle (creator) flags can be found here.
@yaelharel yaelharel added status/triage Issue or PR that requires contributor attention. type/chore Issue that requests non-user facing changes. labels May 6, 2020
@yaelharel yaelharel mentioned this issue May 6, 2020
Merged
@natalieparellano natalieparellano added status/ready Issue ready to be worked on. good first issue A good first issue to get started with. and removed status/triage Issue or PR that requires contributor attention. labels May 6, 2020
@jromero
Copy link
Member

jromero commented Jun 9, 2020

For reference:

@Subhadeep2707
Copy link

Hi, I am working on this issue.

@Subhadeep2707 Subhadeep2707 mentioned this issue Jun 24, 2020
Closed
2 tasks
@dfreilich dfreilich mentioned this issue Feb 9, 2021
Merged
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
good first issue A good first issue to get started with. status/ready Issue ready to be worked on. type/chore Issue that requests non-user facing changes.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
4 participants
@jromero @natalieparellano @Subhadeep2707 @yaelharel