-
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
🌱 Add conditions to the KubeadmConfig object #3125
🌱 Add conditions to the KubeadmConfig object #3125
Conversation
/retitle 🌱 Add conditions to the KubeadmConfig object |
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.
/approve
/milestone v0.3.7
/assign @detiber
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.
After reviewing the related KCP PR, I'm wondering if it would make sense to track whether the certificates are available separate from CertificatesGeneratedCondtion
, since that would give an indication of progress, even after we remove certificate generation from this controller in the future.
My hot take is that I will be a little bit awkward having many KubeadmConfig objects each one reporting certificates are available, but it something that we can reconsider as soon as we get to a point where we can test conditions working on the core set of objects and evaluate possible improvements across the board. |
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
/hold
for @detiber's final review
// | ||
// NOTE: Having the first control plane machine ready is a pre-condition for the additional control planes and | ||
// for workers to join; the KubeadmConfig controller ensure this pre-condition is satisfied. | ||
WaitingForControlPlaneInitializedReason = "WaitingForControlPlaneInitialized" |
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.
Is this same as control plane being ready?
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.
In this case, we are waiting for the first control plane instance to be up and running.
For historical reason, we have two flags tracking this, ready and initialized (with slight differences), but given that for Ready for conditions has a well defined meaning, I'm using WaitingForControlPlaneInitialized here
/hold cancel |
@vincepri let me know when I can squash commits |
@vincepri switched to CertificateAvailable |
@vincepri PTAL |
1aff5d8
to
8cb28c4
Compare
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: fabriziopandini, vincepri 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 |
@vincepri PTAL |
8cb28c4
to
abd654b
Compare
abd654b
to
28b1087
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.
/lgtm
What this PR does / why we need it:
This PR adds conditions to the KubeadmConfig object
Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
Fixes #3110