-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.8k
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
Self describing Pipeline and Task Definitions #993
Comments
This would be great to see! In the catalog repo we're ending up with a lot of docs in the associated readmes (e.g. https://github.com/tektoncd/catalog/tree/master/golang#golangci-lint) but I agree it would be way better to see this in the Tasks and Pipelines themselves! Also maybe related: tektoncd/catalog#7 |
I want to add here that |
Moved it to beta as I feel it can be a small change (doesn't even need to be an API change), and it would be a really really nice to have for beta. We could use standard annotation (like |
/assign |
What should we add regarding this in pipelines? Should we add an optional |
+1 on adding |
This will add a description field to the spec of pipeline, task pipeline resource ond condition so that it can be used to provide the description of these and can also be used by UI to show description Fix tektoncd#993
This will add information about tekton.dev/description annotation which can be added to pipeline, task, resource clustertask and condition so that it can be used to provide the description of these and can also be used by UI to show description. Add docs and also add default empty value annotation behaviour. Fix tektoncd#993
This will add information about tekton.dev/description annotation which can be added to pipeline, task, resource clustertask and condition so that it can be used to provide the description of these and can also be used by UI to show description. Add docs and also add default empty value annotation behaviour. Fix tektoncd#993
hey there! i think this is being discussed in slack also but I noticed that #2089 is doing this via annotation, i dont quit understand why we chose annotation vs. a field in the spec? i would prefer adding a field to the spec if possible, a couple reasons: [edit fixed very confusing typo thanks @sbwsg !!!]
|
Fair enouhg, let's go with the field. I don't have such a strong opinion 😅 |
Thanks @vdemeester @bobcatfish for reviews. I will update the PR today |
This will add description field to spec of pipeline, task, clustertask, resource and condition This can be used to provide description and can further used in CLI and UI. Add docs and tests Fix tektoncd#993
This will add description field to spec of pipeline, task, clustertask, resource and condition This can be used to provide description and can further used in CLI and UI. Add docs and tests Fix tektoncd#993
This will add description field to spec of pipeline, task, clustertask, resource and condition This can be used to provide description and can further used in CLI and UI. Add docs and tests Fix tektoncd#993
This will add description field to spec of pipeline, task, clustertask, resource and condition This can be used to provide description and can further used in CLI and UI. Add docs and tests Fix tektoncd#993
This will add description field to spec of pipeline, task, clustertask, resource and condition This can be used to provide description and can further used in CLI and UI. Add docs and tests Fix #993
Overview
A number of teams are building catalogs of Pipelines and Tasks for the purpose of reuse. Many of these catalog have usage documentation that exists separate from the the actual Pipeline/Task definition.
Proposal
Make usage documentation a fist class concern of Tasks. Perhaps by enhancing task definitions or maybe by introducing a new Kind (TaskInfo?).
Example Scenario
Consider a team that uses a tekton catalog to populate the Design Pallet of CI/CD GUI tool. Having populated a Design Pallet, users may want to Inspect a task to lean more about it's Inputs, Outputs, version number, intended use, etc.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: