doc: Go and Rust on cluster build is supported

[matejvasek]

Changes

Update doc: Go and Rust on cluster build is supported.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Patch coverage has no change and project coverage change: +0.92% 🎉

Comparison is base (efb04be) 61.85% compared to head (b99508f) 62.78%.
Report is 2 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #1923      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   61.85%   62.78%   +0.92%     
==========================================
  Files         107      107              
  Lines       13813    13814       +1     
==========================================
+ Hits         8544     8673     +129     
+ Misses       4415     4262     -153     
- Partials      854      879      +25     

Flag	Coverage Δ
e2e-test	35.49% <ø> (+0.08%)	⬆️
e2e-test-oncluster	30.71% <ø> (-0.12%)	⬇️
e2e-test-oncluster-runtime	25.65% <ø> (?)
e2e-test-runtime-go	25.84% <ø> (?)
e2e-test-runtime-node	26.93% <ø> (?)
e2e-test-runtime-python	26.93% <ø> (?)
e2e-test-runtime-quarkus	27.04% <ø> (?)
e2e-test-runtime-rust	25.93% <ø> (?)
e2e-test-runtime-springboot	26.07% <ø> (?)
e2e-test-runtime-typescript	27.04% <ø> (?)
integration-tests	51.44% <ø> (+2.12%)	⬆️
unit-tests-macos-latest	48.28% <ø> (+0.02%)	⬆️
unit-tests-ubuntu-latest	49.07% <ø> (+<0.01%)	⬆️
unit-tests-windows-latest	48.32% <ø> (+<0.01%)	⬆️

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

see 6 files with indirect coverage changes

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

[matejvasek]

PTAL @jrangelramos

[Shashankft9]

this can be removed, since its not relevant anymore:

func/docs/building-functions/on_cluster_build.md

Lines 39 to 43 in 76f09c6

	# builderImages: # optional, needed only if the runtime is golang
	# pack: ghcr.io/boson-project/go-function-builder:tip
	buildpacks: []
	builder: ""
	buildEnvs: []

[Shashankft9]

would it make sense to add some documentation around why we are using knative custom jammy builders instead of paketo base?
And maybe in the func development guide to make use of those two env variables if the tekton tasks are changed?

[matejvasek]

would it make sense to add some documentation around why we are using knative custom jammy builders instead of paketo base? And maybe in the func development guide to make use of those two env variables if the tekton tasks are changed?

Jammy is now the paketo builder. The previous one has been deprecated.

[matejvasek]

And maybe in the func development guide to make use of those two env variables if the tekton tasks are changed?

What do you mean? @Shashankft9

[matejvasek]

would it make sense to add some documentation around why we are using knative custom jammy builders instead of paketo base? And maybe in the func development guide to make use of those two env variables if the tekton tasks are changed?

Jammy is now the paketo builder. The previous one has been deprecated.

What I mean is https://github.com/paketo-buildpacks/base-builder says:

This repository has been archived by the owner on Jul 20, 2023. It is now read-only.

[matejvasek]

I don't think we need to justify our builder IMO.

[matejvasek]

PTAL @jrangelramos

[matejvasek]

PTAL @Shashankft9

[knative-prow]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: matejvasek, Shashankft9

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

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• OWNERS [matejvasek]

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