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

"workspace" field isn't relative to yaml; but PWD #503

Closed
ahmetb opened this issue May 2, 2018 · 5 comments
Closed

"workspace" field isn't relative to yaml; but PWD #503

ahmetb opened this issue May 2, 2018 · 5 comments
Labels
area/build area/config kind/feature-request priority/awaiting-more-evidence Lowest Priority. May be useful, but there is not yet enough supporting evidence.

Comments

@ahmetb
Copy link
Contributor

ahmetb commented May 2, 2018

In skaffold v0.5.0 , it appears like "workspace" field is relative to the directory where the command is run (a.k.a. $PWD) rather than the yaml file.

Is this by design and/or the desired behavior?

For example, if I have a voting-app in my current dir ($PWD) and this yaml at ./skaffold/skaffold.yaml:

  - imageName: vote
    workspace: ../voting-app/vote/

I expect that the workspace will be computed relative to ./skaffold not $PWD(=.).

@nkubala
Copy link
Contributor

nkubala commented Nov 29, 2018

I think this was originally by design, but this can actually be a bit confusing, especially because we support passing in a path to a skaffold.yaml which can live anywhere. We should probably support passing in a skaffold workspace to set as the "root" for all other relative paths specified in the skaffold.yaml

@thomas-riccardi
Copy link

Other relative paths should probably be changed to be relative to the skaffold.yaml file:

cf #387 (comment)

@balopat
Copy link
Contributor

balopat commented Sep 20, 2019

I agree that this is counter-intutitive but we'll have to be careful not to break people who are already using path resolution the current way. It would be great to have more feedback/support from the community around this.

@balopat balopat added the priority/awaiting-more-evidence Lowest Priority. May be useful, but there is not yet enough supporting evidence. label Sep 20, 2019
@mistereechapman
Copy link

Its becoming a bit of a mess, a bit more control over the docker file build would be great. <- feed back and support in a line 👍

Skaffold v1.0.0 issue
Even adding the workspace prop on the docker build definition would help us

@tstromberg
Copy link
Contributor

Thank you for the idea!

I'm closing this issue as it's been open a while, and it is not clear if it's still an open issue. No one has recently stated an interest in addressing this, but if you feel strongly about it, please feel free to add a comment or send us a PR!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
area/build area/config kind/feature-request priority/awaiting-more-evidence Lowest Priority. May be useful, but there is not yet enough supporting evidence.
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

7 participants