use yardstick validate: subprocess-based proof of concept #372
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This is put up to contrast with a CLI invocation of yardstick, which might be preferable. Signed-off-by: Will Murphy <[email protected]>
Otherwise, we still have some yardstick internals inside grype-db-manager. A further improvement might be to capture if necessary via the yardstick subprocess. Signed-off-by: Will Murphy <[email protected]>
15 tasks
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Use changes from anchore/yardstick#380 to simplify validations in grype-db.
This is an alternative approach to #371
It might make sense to add a
--capture=True|False|IfMissingtype of option toyardstick validate, so that thecapture_resultscall can be moved out of grype-db-manager.Opening as a point of discussion.