Skip to content

Conversation

@WeiZhang555
Copy link
Contributor

@WeiZhang555 WeiZhang555 commented Oct 27, 2016

Related runc PR: opencontainers/runc#1150

Signed-off-by: Zhang Wei [email protected]

@wking
Copy link
Contributor

wking commented Oct 27, 2016

Instead of using an array for a structure where order is insignificant
and duplicates are not allowed, I'd rather use an object (since the
just-landed #584, all of our objects forbid duplicates and do not have
significant ordering). I've filed #598 with that approach. I
understand that migrating from an array to an object will be painful,
but I think it's worth it if we have no reason to use arrays for
portable ordering or duplication. One benefit of using an object is
that we get much easier add-or-replace and removal code than hacks
like this 1.

@crosbymichael
Copy link
Member

crosbymichael commented Oct 27, 2016

LGTM

Approved with PullApprove

1 similar comment
@hqhq
Copy link
Contributor

hqhq commented Nov 1, 2016

LGTM

Approved with PullApprove

@hqhq hqhq merged commit b8e2ebe into opencontainers:master Nov 1, 2016
hqhq added a commit to hqhq/runtime-spec that referenced this pull request Nov 3, 2016
Alternative of opencontainers#583 , as what we do for `namespaces`
in opencontainers#597 .

Signed-off-by: Qiang Huang <[email protected]>
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