Skip to content

ROX-32105: Expose inBaseImageLayer graphql interface#18381

Merged
c-du merged 7 commits intomasterfrom
base-image-graphql
Jan 20, 2026
Merged

ROX-32105: Expose inBaseImageLayer graphql interface#18381
c-du merged 7 commits intomasterfrom
base-image-graphql

Conversation

@c-du
Copy link
Contributor

@c-du c-du commented Jan 6, 2026 •
edited
Loading

This PR is to expose the newly added inBaseImageLayer to the graphql API for image component v2.

User-facing documentation

Testing and quality

  • the change is production ready: the change is GA, or otherwise the functionality is gated by a feature flag
  • CI results are inspected

Most graphql changes for base image was added by #18063.

Automated testing

  • added unit tests
  • manual graphql tests
  • modified existing tests

How I validated my change

change me!

@c-du c-du requested a review from daynewlee January 6, 2026 22:59
@rhacs-bot
Copy link
Contributor

rhacs-bot commented Jan 6, 2026 •
edited
Loading

Images are ready for the commit at ac310c9.

To use with deploy scripts, first export MAIN_IMAGE_TAG=4.10.x-825-gac310c9c2b.

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jan 6, 2026 •
edited
Loading

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 49.05%. Comparing base (9b5f9c8) to head (ac310c9).

Additional details and impacted files 
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master   #18381      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   49.04%   49.05%   +0.01%     
==========================================
  Files        2650     2650              
  Lines      198907   198921      +14     
==========================================
+ Hits        97545    97580      +35     
+ Misses      93925    93905      -20     
+ Partials     7437     7436       -1
Flag Coverage Δ
go-unit-tests 49.05% <100.00%> (+0.01%) ⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

@daynewlee
Copy link
Contributor

daynewlee commented Jan 8, 2026

Hi @c-du , I am not really familiar with the graphQL changes, I will defer this PR to @ksurabhi91 or @pedrottimark to have another look.

@sachaudh
Copy link
Contributor

sachaudh commented Jan 12, 2026

Hi @c-du , I am not really familiar with the graphQL changes, I will defer this PR to @ksurabhi91 or @pedrottimark to have another look.

I think @ksurabhi91 can take a look at the GraphQL changes.

@c-du @daynewlee please keep me in the loop with any changes/deviations from the established design. I believe the field was inBaseImageLayer but if this changed, we'll need to update the UI to use the new term to prevent issues. Some reasoning about why we decided to deviate would be helpful as well.

daynewlee
daynewlee reviewed Jan 12, 2026
View reviewed changes
@c-du
Copy link
Contributor Author

c-du commented Jan 12, 2026

Hi @c-du , I am not really familiar with the graphQL changes, I will defer this PR to @ksurabhi91 or @pedrottimark to have another look.

I think @ksurabhi91 can take a look at the GraphQL changes.

@c-du @daynewlee please keep me in the loop with any changes/deviations from the established design. I believe the field was inBaseImageLayer but if this changed, we'll need to update the UI to use the new term to prevent issues. Some reasoning about why we decided to deviate would be helpful as well.

Yes, that make sense. I will keep the graphql as we agreed upon.

@c-du c-du requested review from daynewlee and sachaudh January 12, 2026 22:25
@sachaudh
Copy link
Contributor

sachaudh commented Jan 14, 2026

One thing I'm curious about @c-du: What happens if there's an error fetching base image info? How do you convey that error in the API?

@sachaudh sachaudh mentioned this pull request Jan 14, 2026
Merged
5 tasks
@c-du c-du force-pushed the base-image-graphql branch from 4f72871 to 69b6bc0 Compare January 14, 2026 20:33
@sachaudh sachaudh requested a review from ksurabhi91 January 15, 2026 18:07
sachaudh
sachaudh approved these changes Jan 15, 2026
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@sachaudh sachaudh left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This looks good to me from the UI perspective. Left a few comments, but you should have @ksurabhi91 or someone from backend take a look too

@ksurabhi91
Copy link
Contributor

ksurabhi91 commented Jan 16, 2026 •
edited
Loading

@c-du Did you forget to add resolver changes for BaseImageInfo here since I see the tests in the set of change?
inBaseImageLayer field related changes look good just add a negative test case

@ksurabhi91
Copy link
Contributor

ksurabhi91 commented Jan 16, 2026

fix the description to say inBaseImageLayer instead of fromBaseImage

ksurabhi91
ksurabhi91 reviewed Jan 16, 2026
View reviewed changes
ksurabhi91
ksurabhi91 requested changes Jan 16, 2026
View reviewed changes
@c-du
Copy link
Contributor Author

c-du commented Jan 16, 2026

@c-du Did you forget to add resolver changes for BaseImageInfo here since I see the tests in the set of change? inBaseImageLayer field related changes look good just add a negative test case

I did not forget. :) It will come laster.
There are going to be two more PRs coming, one for baseImage(aka baseImageInfo) when created is ready, the other is to add the component layer type. I will dedicate this to inBaseImageLayer.

@c-du c-du changed the title ROX-32105: Fix base image graphql interface ROX-32105: Expose inBaseImageLayer graphql interface Jan 16, 2026
@c-du c-du force-pushed the base-image-graphql branch from 298471b to fe1d3ed Compare January 17, 2026 02:19
@openshift-ci
Copy link

openshift-ci bot commented Jan 17, 2026 •
edited
Loading

@c-du: The following test failed, say /retest to rerun all failed tests or /retest-required to rerun all mandatory failed tests:

Test name Commit Details Required Rerun command
ci/prow/ocp-4-12-nongroovy-e2e-tests 1be1c31 link false /test ocp-4-12-nongroovy-e2e-tests

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard.

Details

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository. I understand the commands that are listed here.

@c-du c-du enabled auto-merge (squash) January 19, 2026 21:10
@c-du c-du disabled auto-merge January 19, 2026 21:11
@c-du c-du requested a review from ksurabhi91 January 19, 2026 22:29
@c-du c-du enabled auto-merge (squash) January 20, 2026 01:11
@c-du c-du merged commit 30c6100 into master Jan 20, 2026
92 of 93 checks passed
@c-du c-du deleted the base-image-graphql branch January 20, 2026 04:52
stehessel pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 20, 2026
@c-du @stehessel
ROX-32105: Expose inBaseImageLayer graphql interface (#18381)
d166e6e
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@sachaudh sachaudh sachaudh approved these changes

@ksurabhi91 ksurabhi91 ksurabhi91 approved these changes

@daynewlee daynewlee Awaiting requested review from daynewlee

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

area/central

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants

@c-du @rhacs-bot @daynewlee @sachaudh @ksurabhi91