-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 14.4k
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
updated service page #43548
updated service page #43548
Conversation
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.
Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
fixed issue #43410 |
✅ Pull request preview available for checkingBuilt without sensitive environment variables
To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify site configuration. |
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.
.
@@ -34,7 +34,8 @@ expect that an individual Pod is reliable and durable). | |||
|
|||
Each Pod gets its own IP address (Kubernetes expects network plugins to ensure this). | |||
For a given Deployment in your cluster, the set of Pods running in one moment in | |||
time could be different from the set of Pods running that application a moment later. | |||
time could be different from the set of Pods running that application a moment later | |||
due to scaling, resources or demand. |
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.
I think Line 38 is optional change
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.
Hi @aj11anuj
Thanks for the review. I included
due to scaling, resources, or demand.
to clarify potential reasons behind the behavior for improved user understanding. If you believe it's optional, I'm open to your suggestion and can adjust if needed.
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.
Thanks @pranav-pandey0804,
I think it's a good decision to make this statement less ambiguous,
However, This doesn't help much the way it is right now imo.
I would look more into pods and pod lifecycles and then make a concise statement
If you need resources, Please ask and I'll be happy to assist
@@ -34,7 +34,8 @@ expect that an individual Pod is reliable and durable). | |||
|
|||
Each Pod gets its own IP address (Kubernetes expects network plugins to ensure this). | |||
For a given Deployment in your cluster, the set of Pods running in one moment in | |||
time could be different from the set of Pods running that application a moment later. | |||
time could be different from the set of Pods running that application a moment later | |||
due to scaling, resources or demand. |
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.
Just adding these factors won't really reduce ambiguity
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.
hi @Gauravpadam ,
Thank you for your feedback and your offer to assist.
I agree with your feedback that Just adding these factors won't make a huge difference in clarity.
I added these factors just to guide the readers so that they could explore the factors in detail, as the resources can be easily found within the Kubernetes documentation.
However, regarding this
This doesn't help much the way it is right now imo.
I intentionally didn't include more info to maintain a clear and focused message.
Providing extensive details might shift the text's primary focus away (from the dynamic nature of Kubernetes and its challenges in maintaining connectivity), potentially making it less effective in conveying the main point.
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.
@Gauravpadam
However, your suggestion is highly valued and I am eager to look at your suggestions to replace these factors in a clearer way which is also concise enough to not shift the focus of the reader from the primary message of the documentation text.
Thanks again for taking the time to look into this.
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.
https://kubernetes.io/docs/concepts/workloads/pods/pod-lifecycle/ is a good place to refer
pinging @mehabhalodiya @bradtopol , |
@pranav-pandey0804 would you be willing to revise this in light of https://github.com/kubernetes/website/pull/43548/files#r1365698319? |
Thank you for your suggestion. I have carefully reviewed the feedback and incorporated the changes accordingly. "For a given Deployment in your cluster, the set of Pods running at a specific moment may have different identities (Pod IDs and IPs) due to the dynamic nature of Kubernetes. While the number of Pods remains constant, their identities can change over time. This change is related to their identities and is not arbitrary. The dynamic nature ensures that Pods are replaced with new, near-identical instances, maintaining continuity but with different UIDs." |
@sftim @Gauravpadam The intention is to maintain clarity and precision in conveying the information to our users. I believe the adjustments address the concerns raised during the review process. |
Compared to #43548 (comment), I personally prefer the text that's already in the page. However, if another contributor feels differently, I think that's fine. Reviewers shouldn't pay any great weight to my opinion here. |
@sftim The current text on the page is perfectly fine but it does require the reader to know the full context, however if the readers are beginners, which they generally are, and trying to learn through documentation then they might get confused that |
@sftim talking about this #43548 (comment), I too find that a bit out of place with respect to the whole text. |
@pranav-pandey0804 Even better, We can keep the text as is and add a reference to the pods lifecycle page for the context of readers |
@bradtopol @mehabhalodiya |
does the original commit creates confusion or increases ambiguity? |
Hello @pranav-pandey0804 . |
/label tide/merge method-squash |
/label tide/merge-method-squash |
I'm going to close this as stale. Thanks for proposing this solution @pranav-pandey0804, but there doesn't seem to be agreement that this change solves the issue. Feel free to re-open if you disagree, or if you have another path you'd like to try. /close |
@nate-double-u: Closed this PR. In response to this:
Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository. |
Clarification and Enhancement of Documentation Statement.