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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Clarify provider impacts in the ClusterClass proposal #5018

Closed
fabriziopandini opened this issue Jul 27, 2021 · 1 comment · Fixed by #5022
Closed

Clarify provider impacts in the ClusterClass proposal #5018

fabriziopandini opened this issue Jul 27, 2021 · 1 comment · Fixed by #5022
Assignees
@fabriziopandini
Labels
kind/feature Categorizes issue or PR as related to a new feature.
Milestone
v0.4

Comments

@fabriziopandini
Copy link
Member

Detailed Description
As per #4993 (comment) the ClusterClass proposal could be improved in explaining impact for the control plane providers, especially after recent discussion on the control plane flavours:

  • Supporting spec.version or not
  • Supporting spec.replicas or not
  • Using control plane machines or not

This can be also an opportunity to document conventions for implementing new template types and expected behaviour for template <-> object reconciliation, given that also this topic was discussed on different threads/PRs

/kind feature
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the kind/feature Categorizes issue or PR as related to a new feature. label Jul 27, 2021
@fabriziopandini
Copy link
Member Author

/milestone v0.4
/assign

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added this to the v0.4 milestone Jul 27, 2021
This was referenced Jul 27, 2021
Merged
Merged
Closed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees

@fabriziopandini fabriziopandini

Labels
kind/feature Categorizes issue or PR as related to a new feature.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
v0.4
2 participants
@fabriziopandini @k8s-ci-robot