Skip to content

docs: document status.executor for BuildRun - #238

Open
schacherle wants to merge 1 commit into
shipwright-io:mainfrom
schacherle:feature/document-buildrun-executor
Open

docs: document status.executor for BuildRun#238
schacherle wants to merge 1 commit into
shipwright-io:mainfrom
schacherle:feature/document-buildrun-executor

Conversation

@schacherle

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Changes

Adds documentation for the status.executor field on BuildRun (a TaskRun/PipelineRun name+kind, added in v0.17.0), which previously had no narrative coverage outside the auto-generated API reference. Also notes that status.taskRunName is deprecated in favor of it, and that a BuildRun can now be backed by a PipelineRun in addition to a TaskRun.

Related Issue

Related to #179 — note that issue's condition ("if it has been referenced") didn't actually apply, since the narrative docs never referenced taskRunName to begin with. This isn't a fix to an incorrect reference, just new coverage for a previously undocumented field.

Type of PR

/kind documentation

Submitter Checklist

  • Includes tests if functionality changed/was added
  • Includes docs if changes are user-facing
  • Kind label has been set
  • Release notes block has been filled in, or marked NONE

Release Notes

NONE

Related to shipwright-io#179

Signed-off-by: Ernst Schacherl <git+shipwright@schacherl.dev>
@openshift-ci openshift-ci Bot added the kind/documentation Categorizes issue or PR as related to documentation. label Jul 10, 2026
@pull-request-size pull-request-size Bot added the size/S Denotes a PR that changes 10-29 lines, ignoring generated files. label Jul 10, 2026

@adambkaplan adambkaplan left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

/lgtm
/hold

Looks good, though we may want to have #237 merge first, and have this fix "back-ported" to 0.20 in addition to the "next" docs.

@openshift-ci openshift-ci Bot added do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. labels Jul 23, 2026

@IrvingMg IrvingMg left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

#237 has been merged.

/hold cancel
/approve

@openshift-ci openshift-ci Bot removed the do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. label Aug 22, 2026
@openshift-ci

openshift-ci Bot commented Aug 22, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: IrvingMg
Once this PR has been reviewed and has the lgtm label, please ask for approval from adambkaplan. For more information see the Code Review Process.

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

Details Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

kind/documentation Categorizes issue or PR as related to documentation. lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. size/S Denotes a PR that changes 10-29 lines, ignoring generated files.

Projects

Status: No status

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants