README.md tweaks

[eden881]

What this PR does / why we need it?

This PR improves the aesthetics and readability of the tool's documentation.

PR Checklist

• This PR adds K8s exceptions (false positives)
• This PR adds new code
• This PR includes tests for new/existing code
• This PR adds docs

[codecov-commenter]

⚠️ Please install the to ensure uploads and comments are reliably processed by Codecov.

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 43.43%. Comparing base (6d80b66) to head (3193781).
Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

❗ Your organization needs to install the Codecov GitHub app to enable full functionality.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main     #390   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   43.43%   43.43%           
=======================================
  Files          63       63           
  Lines        4043     4043           
=======================================
  Hits         1756     1756           
  Misses       2039     2039           
  Partials      248      248           

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[doronkg]

I'd like to make a suggestion.

I think the following parts that describe the unused resources are repetitive and make the README excessive, as the list is properly structured in the “Supported resources and limitations” table.

It also requires contributors to update 3 parts of the README each time a new resource is supported.

1. General:

Currently, Kor can identify and list unused:

• ConfigMaps
• Secrets
  ...

2. Usage:

Kor provides various subcommands to identify and list unused resources. The available commands are:

• all - Gets all unused resources for the specified namespace or all namespaces.
• configmap - Gets unused ConfigMaps for the specified namespace or all namespaces.
  ...

Perhaps we can dedup it.
@eden881 wdyt?

[eden881]

@eden881 wdyt?

@doronkg Sounds like a good idea, but I believe this is outside the scope of this PR, as I only aim to improve the existing docs here. I think structural changes to the README should be discussed and done in a separate thread.

[doronkg]

Fine by me, we'll address that separately. Approved 👍🏻
@yonahd