-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 42
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
Simplification of the README.md #207
Conversation
Signed-off-by: Mathieu Benoit <[email protected]>
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.
Honestly, I don't think this is the right thing. I'd rather we kept the github repos as the source of truth for the implementation documentation and linked to that / copied it in the docs site if necessary. This means the docs can be versioned alongside the implementation and means that other people writing implementations that are not in the score-spec org have a good example to follow - they should document their implementations in their readme because that is most accessible.
@@ -13,143 +15,6 @@ | |||
| `containers.*.resources.limits` / `containers.*.resources.requests` | none | **Limits will be validated but ignored.** While the compose specification has some support for this, it is requires particular Docker versions that cannot be relied on. *This should have no impact on Workload execution*. | | |||
| `containers.*.livenessProbe` / `containers.*.readinessProbe` | none | **Probes will be validated but ignored.** The Score specification only details K8s-like HTTP probes, but the compose specification only supports direct command execution. We cannot convert between the two reliably. *This should have no impact on Workload execution*. Tracked in [#86](https://github.com/score-spec/score-compose/issues/86). | | |||
|
|||
## Resource support |
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 don't think we should remove this, this is very useful here because it is version controlled along with the readme and the release. I can go back and look at the supported resources for an older version by viewing the readme on github. It also acts as a good source of truth for the docs to be based on since the docs are not updated in the same release as this repo.
|
||
**NOTE**: the following examples and guides relate to `score-compose >= 0.11.0`, check your version using `score-compose --version` and re-install if you're behind! | ||
|
||
See the [examples](./examples) for more examples of using Score and provisioning resources: |
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.
The Examples page in our docs is pretty poor and just directs right back to the repo... can we move this examples index into the examples directory instead please?
|
||
## Installation | ||
|
||
To install `score-compose`, follow the instructions as described in our [installation guide](https://docs.score.dev/docs/score-implementation/score-compose/#installation). You will also need a recent version of Docker and the Compose plugin installed. Read more [here](https://docs.docker.com/compose/install/). |
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.
Why remove this? it's already linking to the docs and makes it very easy for someone scanning the repo to see.
Got your point, the idea was to remove the duplicated info to maintain, etc. and having the source of truth in the docs themselves. Closing for now. |
Simplification of the README.md as the content deleted is now there: https://docs.score.dev/docs/score-implementation/score-compose/.
Note: I kept the feature limitation and the
--publish-port
parts for now as they are not yet in this doc mentioned above.