-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.2k
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
Update allowed components to reflect other things that run in knative-serving #8513
Update allowed components to reflect other things that run in knative-serving #8513
Conversation
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: mattmoor 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 |
Let's add the kourier stuff here too. I think we should get rid of it running in a separate namespace and in fact the operator is going to get rid of that most likely. |
# - istiocontroller | ||
# - nscontroller | ||
enabledComponents: "controller,hpaautoscaler,certcontroller,istiocontroller,nscontroller,webhook" | ||
enabledComponents: "controller,contour-ingress-controller,hpaautoscaler,certcontroller,istiocontroller,net-http01,nscontroller,webhook" |
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.
(lacking context) why is this not an array?
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.
configmaps are map[string]string
"hpaautoscaler", | ||
"certcontroller", | ||
"istiocontroller", | ||
"net-http01", |
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.
Would this be pushed to their own repos at some 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.
Given how we've centralized this configmap validation it's not really plausible right now. However, I'd like to move to enable this by default and eliminate this flag ASAP in 0.17.
@markusthoemmes I can add kourier, but it's a little weird given that we run it in its own namespace. I think my preference would be to just enable this by default right after we snap 0.16, so that we can kill this field entirely. This validation doesn't jive particularly well with us plugging other components into the same namespace 😬 LMK if you want me to throw |
cc @pmorie Paul, LMK if you have any objections to trying to enable this by default early in 0.17? I'd like to have this bake for as long as possible to flush out any latent bugs. |
/lgtm |
No description provided.