Skip to content
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

Version kustomization.yaml files #144

Closed
r2d4 opened this issue Jun 28, 2018 · 5 comments
Closed

Version kustomization.yaml files #144

r2d4 opened this issue Jun 28, 2018 · 5 comments
Assignees
Labels
priority/backlog Higher priority than priority/awaiting-more-evidence.

Comments

@r2d4
Copy link

r2d4 commented Jun 28, 2018

I'm hoping to do some parsing of the kustomization.yaml files and it would be helpful if the config was versioned. Maybe kubernetes style?

@Liujingfang1
Copy link
Contributor

Liujingfang1 commented Jun 28, 2018

@r2d4 I took a look at your PR, you want to add the support of custom path instead of using current directory. In skaffold.yaml, you can add a field for this custom path and pass that to kustomize. kustomize is able to build a given direcory as kustomize build <path>.

@r2d4
Copy link
Author

r2d4 commented Jun 28, 2018

Hi @Liujingfang1, the reference is not necessarily for the PR, but for the comment in the code.

To get the file dependencies of the kustomization.yaml file, we would need to actually parse the YAML. To ensure that parsing doesn't break, we should parse it according to some well known version, e.g. kustomize/v1alpha2

@Liujingfang1
Copy link
Contributor

@r2d4 kustomization.yaml doesn't have version since it is not a kubernetes type. I don't think adding a version for it makes sense.

@r2d4
Copy link
Author

r2d4 commented Jun 28, 2018

If there are breaking changes to the kustomization.yaml, how will downstream tooling that reads or generates kustomize files know?

@Liujingfang1 Liujingfang1 added the priority/backlog Higher priority than priority/awaiting-more-evidence. label Jul 10, 2018
@monopole
Copy link
Contributor

@r2d4 we had this (standards k8s metadata / group-version-kind fields) and dropped it temporarily as, at the time, those fields weren't consumed by anything and in the case of a simple overlay (e.g. just adding a nameprefix) could double the size of the file.

Decided to add them back as soon as we needed to make any kind of breaking change, or had a tool that exploited them. Should probably do it sooner rather than later to avoid confusion about how they'll be versioned.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
priority/backlog Higher priority than priority/awaiting-more-evidence.
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants