-
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
🐛 fixed a number of broken markdown links #5702
🐛 fixed a number of broken markdown links #5702
Conversation
docs/staging-use-cases.md
Outdated
@@ -191,7 +188,7 @@ Multitenancy Management | |||
|
|||
- As a multi-cluster operator, I would like to provide an EKS-like experience in which the workload control plane nodes are joined to the management cluster and the control plane config isn’t exposed to the consumer of the workload cluster. This enables me as an operator to manage the control plane nodes for all clusters using tooling like prometheus and fluentd. I can also control the configuration of the workload control plane in accordance with business policy. | |||
|
|||
### Multitenancy Management | |||
### Multitenancy for Management Clusters |
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.
since this is already under the "Operator of Management Cluster" section, isn't adding "for management clusters" redundant? Also, reading the cases, I feel like it's not really multitenancy for the management cluster, but more multitenancy for workload clusters but from the point of view of a management cluster operator
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.
My reading is that this section is about about having multiple users with rights on the management cluster e.g. cluster creation, deletion etc. The above section (L153) is about preventing workload cluster users from interfering with the management cluster.
The main reason for changing this was to stop the clash between this multitenancy management and the duplicate on L153 which previously broke the link.
Any name change will do - let me know what you think will work well here.
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.
On testing it looks like the multitenancy-management-1 link works on github, but it's not part of every markdown so it wasn't working for me locally. I'll revert this
96bb73c
to
1274455
Compare
Signed-off-by: killianmuldoon <[email protected]>
1274455
to
39ccdb2
Compare
/retest |
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
/approve
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: CecileRobertMichon 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 |
Signed-off-by: killianmuldoon [email protected]
Fixes for a number of links in our MD docs which were either outdated or not working properly for some other reason.