-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 178
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
[Service Mesh] General Improvements #1959
Changes from all commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
|
@@ -27,7 +27,7 @@ const useRouteForNotebook = ( | |
if (notebookName && projectName) { | ||
// if not using service mesh fetch openshift route, otherwise get Istio Ingress Gateway route | ||
const getRoutePromise = !enableServiceMesh | ||
? getRoute(notebookName, projectName).then((route) => route?.spec.host) | ||
? getRoute(notebookName, projectName).then((route) => route.spec.host) | ||
: getServiceMeshGwHost(projectName); | ||
Comment on lines
29
to
31
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. If There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I don't think so. Since if a notebook has been created or restarted with Potentially a user could start a notebook, leave it running and then install service mesh + enable the feature flag, and then be in a state where this scenario could apply. But from previous conversations, I don't think the goal is to support this partial Oauth/Istio state, the user should just restart the notebook in this case. |
||
|
||
getRoutePromise | ||
|
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.
This function is going away in #2010 -- what is the OSSM need here? You just work or not work based on the feature flag? Do you have any backend component stack (in the DSC) that we can look at?