Closed Ichmed closed 1 year ago
@Ichmed thanks for your work and effort. Your coding is great and as we discussed I expected the type of changes that are part of the pull request. On the other side there are also some changes that I wonder about and consider unrelated to the topic and that also turns the pull request into a hard to review state. To be honest I stopped reading at the commit where git told me it's too large diff to be showed by default.
I was sort of ok with the big changes regarding the clippy patch last time but going forward we should not create pull requests that are practically not in a review state. Please avoid
I also think it makes sense to create commits per responsibility. Like in an object oriented design pattern when a class is usually developed for a single responsibility also the flow of commits in a pull request can follow this style. In this particular case I though it would be useful to structure the set of commits like this
That would turn things right and allows for a real review.
Let me know if this makes sense to you
Thanks
I didn't realize there were so many whitespace changes, I'll setup a new PR with just the content, however this means we should probably set up a rustfmt job like the clippy one to prevent this in the future.
Closed, will open new PR
first part of #128
Includes only podman config, will copy the approach for firecracker and/or create generic version for all back ends if approved
Adds lazy_static for config initialization, can be removed if rust version is bumped to one that includes OnceCell