{"action":"created","issue":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/docker/docker/issues/11827","labels_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/docker/docker/issues/11827/labels{/name}","comments_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/docker/docker/issues/11827/comments","events_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/docker/docker/issues/11827/events","html_url":"https://github.com/docker/docker/pull/11827","id":64584426,"number":11827,"title":"Add a new event for process exiting","user":{"login":"mgood","id":29016,"avatar_url":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/29016?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/mgood","html_url":"https://github.com/mgood","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/mgood/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/mgood/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/mgood/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/mgood/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/mgood/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/mgood/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/mgood/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/mgood/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/mgood/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"labels":[{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/docker/docker/labels/status/1-needs-design-review","name":"status/1-needs-design-review","color":"fef2c0"}],"state":"open","locked":false,"assignee":null,"milestone":null,"comments":12,"created_at":"2015-03-26T17:08:22Z","updated_at":"2015-06-12T23:00:27Z","closed_at":null,"pull_request":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/docker/docker/pulls/11827","html_url":"https://github.com/docker/docker/pull/11827","diff_url":"https://github.com/docker/docker/pull/11827.diff","patch_url":"https://github.com/docker/docker/pull/11827.patch"},"body":"Send a new event when a container process exits without being requested. This\r\nevent can be used when a program needs to detect that a container exited\r\nunexpectedly.\r\n\r\nThis event is sent after \"die\" when the exit was not expected for another\r\ncommand like \"stop\", \"kill\", or \"restart\".\r\n\r\nThis addresses part of #10654 regarding how to distinguish unexpected exits, though the other part of that issue seems to be clarifying the documentation on the \"die\" event.\r\n\r\nThis event is currently called \"process-exit\" but I'm not attached to that name and it can be easily changed. Maybe just \"exited\" would be sufficient, since this is similar to the distinction of [`wait()`](http://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man2/wait.2.html) return codes, where `WIFEXITED(status)` is true if the process ended itself via `exit()` vs. `WIFSIGNALED(status)` when the process was ended via a signal."},"comment":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/docker/docker/issues/comments/111636796","html_url":"https://github.com/docker/docker/pull/11827#issuecomment-111636796","issue_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/docker/docker/issues/11827","id":111636796,"user":{"login":"icecrime","id":1564054,"avatar_url":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/1564054?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/icecrime","html_url":"https://github.com/icecrime","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/icecrime/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/icecrime/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/icecrime/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/icecrime/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/icecrime/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/icecrime/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/icecrime/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/icecrime/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/icecrime/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"created_at":"2015-06-12T23:00:27Z","updated_at":"2015-06-12T23:00:27Z","body":"@mgood Sorry for the lack of attention on this PR. I stick to what I said earlier, but at the same time we don't have anything better, and the feature is indeed useful.\r\n\r\nSo +1 on design, do you please mind rebasing so we can go with code review? Thanks!"}}