-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.3k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
📖 CAEP: Flexible Managed Kubernetes Endpoints #8500
📖 CAEP: Flexible Managed Kubernetes Endpoints #8500
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
made a quick pass. it looks great so far 🥳
2723963
to
c904d5f
Compare
c904d5f
to
165d4d4
Compare
0a7661d
to
f5a81be
Compare
Simplifying the support for managed Kubernetes is truly a great effort. However, I believe that using a control plane/bootstrap "provider" to handle infrastructure specific options such as regions might deviate from the original concept of a control plane/bootstrap provider where the primary objective of such a provider is to offer an approach for configuring Kubernetes components that operate on the machine. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@jackfrancis
thanks for this new iteration of this proposal, IMO It is striking a good balance between surfacing all the context and the discussions in the working group, and focus and clarity on the proposed solution
/lgtm
LGTM label has been added. Git tree hash: 1768f6112c6ffbffbdec42b610379d9c4c3a7641
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Overall lgtm, just some nits
f5a81be
to
548b3dd
Compare
1807fe7
to
57c45f1
Compare
Signed-off-by: Jack Francis <[email protected]>
57c45f1
to
5c8d5a3
Compare
113dc2e
to
ded981a
Compare
Signed-off-by: Jack Francis <[email protected]>
ded981a
to
9547470
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Great work @jackfrancis
/lgtm
LGTM label has been added. Git tree hash: 1e5da141d911a983061809ab775121311ccd3f99
|
/retest |
// The port on which the endpoint is serving. | ||
Port int32 `json:"port"` | ||
|
||
// Cluster is a reference to the cluster name that this endpoint is reachable on. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
nit: ident is off
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
/lgtm
thanks @jackfrancis |
lazy consensus deadline passed (Friday before KubeCon) |
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: fabriziopandini 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:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
/hold cancel |
/area documentation |
What this PR does / why we need it:
This PR introduces a proposal to make Cluster Infra Resource Optional in Cluster API to aid Managed Kubernetes provider scenarios.
After this PR we will want to create an issue that describes the implementation tasks
Which issue(s) this PR fixes (optional, in
fixes #<issue number>(, fixes #<issue_number>, ...)
format, will close the issue(s) when PR gets merged):Fixes #7494
References #5295