Skip to content

Conversation

@afritzler
Copy link
Member

@afritzler afritzler commented Feb 6, 2026

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • Refactor
    • Image resolution validation has been relaxed. Images with missing components will now be accepted and processed successfully instead of returning validation errors, enabling more flexible image handling.

@afritzler afritzler requested a review from a team as a code owner February 6, 2026 10:17
@github-actions github-actions bot added size/S enhancement New feature or request labels Feb 6, 2026
@afritzler afritzler added breaking and removed enhancement New feature or request size/S labels Feb 6, 2026
@coderabbitai
Copy link

coderabbitai bot commented Feb 6, 2026

Walkthrough

Removed runtime validation that enforced the presence of RootFS, Kernel, and InitRAMFs in the ResolveImage function. The function now constructs and returns the Image object regardless of missing components, with unknown layer type validation unchanged. Corresponding test case removed.

Changes

Cohort / File(s) Summary
Validation Removal
image.go, image_test.go
Removed validation logic that returned errors for incomplete images and deleted the associated test case verifying this behavior.

Estimated code review effort

🎯 1 (Trivial) | ⏱️ ~3 minutes

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 2 | ❌ 1
❌ Failed checks (1 warning)
Check name Status Explanation Resolution
Description check ⚠️ Warning The pull request description is empty, but the repository template requires at least 'Proposed Changes' section with bullet points and a 'Fixes' reference. Add a description explaining the rationale for removing the layer validation check, what problems this solves, and any potential implications of allowing incomplete images.
✅ Passed checks (2 passed)
Check name Status Explanation
Title check ✅ Passed The title accurately describes the main change: removing the validation check for missing layers (RootFS, Kernel, InitRAMFs) from ResolveImage.
Docstring Coverage ✅ Passed No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check.

✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings.

✨ Finishing touches
  • 📝 Generate docstrings
🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
  • Create PR with unit tests
  • Post copyable unit tests in a comment
  • Commit unit tests in branch enh/missing-layers

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.

@afritzler afritzler added the enhancement New feature or request label Feb 6, 2026
@afritzler afritzler merged commit d9a73f6 into main Feb 6, 2026
9 checks passed
@afritzler afritzler deleted the enh/missing-layers branch February 6, 2026 10:25
@hardikdr hardikdr added the area/metal-automation Automation processes within the Metal project. label Feb 7, 2026
@hardikdr hardikdr added this to Roadmap Feb 7, 2026
@github-project-automation github-project-automation bot moved this to Done in Roadmap Feb 7, 2026
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

area/metal-automation Automation processes within the Metal project. breaking enhancement New feature or request

Projects

Status: Done

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants