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.

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

[feature request] Should an Operator be good to turn vanilla k8s cluster to OpenYurt one? #328

Closed
gnunu opened this issue May 27, 2021 · 2 comments · Fixed by #401
Closed
Labels
kind/feature kind/feature

Comments

@gnunu
Copy link
Member

gnunu commented May 27, 2021

What would you like to be added:
An easy way (for user) to do k8s to OpenYurt tranlsation, automatically and thoroughly.

Why is this needed:
Sounds an Operator can do this tedious job. This Operator would watch the changes of cluster and do translation or update if needed.

others
Sounds not so easy to do, but it will be good to devops. Anyway, Operator is for automation of doing tedious things.

/kind feature

@gnunu gnunu added the kind/feature kind/feature label May 27, 2021
@rambohe-ch
Copy link
Member

@gnunu Very appreciate for your issue.

It's a good idea to make an Operator to take over cluster translation. and the plan to settle it, i think we can discuss this issue on OpenYurt community meeting and add feedback here. we also welcome you to participate in OpenYurt community meeting on June 2, 2021 11:00~12:00(Beijing time)

the detail info of community info: https://github.com/openyurtio/openyurt#meeting

@gnunu
Copy link
Member Author

gnunu commented Jun 16, 2021

Thanks. The merits to do OpenYurt translation by an Operator is it's a general, automatic and close-loop way in terms of taking care of nodes entering and leaving. I can do some expewriments for getting more details to chat in the meeting.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
kind/feature kind/feature
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants