Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Feb 22, 2022. It is now read-only.

[stable/jaeger-operator] WATCH_NAMESPACE should be configurable #14968

Closed
marcindulak opened this issue Jun 21, 2019 · 6 comments
Closed

[stable/jaeger-operator] WATCH_NAMESPACE should be configurable #14968

marcindulak opened this issue Jun 21, 2019 · 6 comments
Labels
lifecycle/stale Denotes an issue or PR has remained open with no activity and has become stale.

Comments

@marcindulak
Copy link

Describe the bug

According to jaegertracing/jaeger-operator#60 the value of WATCH_NAMESPACE in

- name: WATCH_NAMESPACE
valueFrom:
fieldRef:
fieldPath: metadata.namespace
should be an empty string.

Version of Helm and Kubernetes:

k8s-v.1.10.6
helm-v2.8.1

Which chart:

[stable/jaeger-operator]

What happened:

What you expected to happen:

How to reproduce it (as minimally and precisely as possible):

Anything else we need to know:

@marcindulak
Copy link
Author

Actually an old stale issue about the same problem exists #9298

@jpkrohling
Copy link
Contributor

I believe this value should be customizable, as one might want to have multiple operators in the same cluster, each watching different namespaces, like in a multi-tenant scenario.

@marcindulak marcindulak changed the title [stable/jaeger-operator] WATCH_NAMESPACE should be an empty string [stable/jaeger-operator] WATCH_NAMESPACE should configurable Jun 21, 2019
@marcindulak marcindulak changed the title [stable/jaeger-operator] WATCH_NAMESPACE should configurable [stable/jaeger-operator] WATCH_NAMESPACE should be configurable Jun 24, 2019
@stale
Copy link

stale bot commented Jul 24, 2019

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. Any further update will cause the issue/pull request to no longer be considered stale. Thank you for your contributions.

@stale stale bot added the lifecycle/stale Denotes an issue or PR has remained open with no activity and has become stale. label Jul 24, 2019
@marcindulak
Copy link
Author

Link an old, unmerged PR for reference #9566

@stale stale bot removed the lifecycle/stale Denotes an issue or PR has remained open with no activity and has become stale. label Jul 24, 2019
@stale
Copy link

stale bot commented Aug 23, 2019

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. Any further update will cause the issue/pull request to no longer be considered stale. Thank you for your contributions.

@stale stale bot added the lifecycle/stale Denotes an issue or PR has remained open with no activity and has become stale. label Aug 23, 2019
@stale
Copy link

stale bot commented Sep 6, 2019

This issue is being automatically closed due to inactivity.

@stale stale bot closed this as completed Sep 6, 2019
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
lifecycle/stale Denotes an issue or PR has remained open with no activity and has become stale.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants