Enrique Encalada

Yes, I think the alternative to the runtime feature is a user Dockerfile that follows the multi-stage best practices. @ImJasonH for the rebase strategy and merely speaking about buildpacks, one...

> Using pack rebase would only work to rebase images produced by buildpacks (AFAIK), since it relies on base image information in image annotations. yes, thats my understanding. I still...

> We haven't modelled well enough how we should be "overriding" values from a Build to the ones in BuildStrategy. That's a nice design effort that should be undertaken with...

For > error: .status.conditions accessor error: is of the type , expected []interface{} the root cause is that this [call](https://github.com/shipwright-io/build/blob/master/Makefile#L243) hits a nil. Basically at the time the `wait` is...

@sbose78 thanks for the issue. Im trying to get this idea first, compared to how tekton tasks manage the `spec.params` see https://github.com/tektoncd/pipeline/blob/master/docs/tasks.md#specifying-parameters , how is it different to the `spec.parameters`...

@sbose78 I think I get the idea. Do we need to also layout specific PARAMs we know all strategies share?

From refinement, we did drop the operator-sdk from the Build project. @adambkaplan we think you might have more context to decide if any of the alternatives would work.

From Refinement, this still in Progress but subject to change, @adambkaplan to provide an update later.

@adambkaplan how long does this issue needs to be open? what is missing?

From refinement, there is no clear deadline on this, as of today.