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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Ignore Routes that are specified in OpenShift recipe type #6216

Closed
sleshchenko opened this issue Sep 11, 2017 · 0 comments
Closed

Ignore Routes that are specified in OpenShift recipe type #6216

sleshchenko opened this issue Sep 11, 2017 · 0 comments
Assignees
@sleshchenko
Labels
kind/task Internal things, technical debt, and to-do tasks to be performed.

Comments

@sleshchenko
Copy link
Member

sleshchenko commented Sep 11, 2017 •
edited by garagatyi
Loading

Related to SPI branch only.
Current OpenShift spi implementation creates Routes that are specified in OpenShift recipe type, but does not resolve them as servers.
It doesn't make sense to create them while they are not resolved as servers and their publicly accessible URLs are not returned by Workspace API.
As it was decided not to expose automatically something (ports in dockerimage, dockerfile, etc) as servers It is needed to modify current approach with following changes:

  • Do not create Routes that are specified in recipe by user;
  • If Routes are present in OpenShift Recipe, add a warning(to InternalRuntime warnings list) that they will be ignored. It also could contain information that user can define a server in workspace config to expose a container port.
@garagatyi garagatyi added team/platform kind/task Internal things, technical debt, and to-do tasks to be performed. status/open-for-dev An issue has had its specification reviewed and confirmed. Waiting for an engineer to take it. labels Sep 11, 2017
@sleshchenko sleshchenko mentioned this issue Sep 11, 2017
Closed
@skabashnyuk skabashnyuk mentioned this issue Sep 11, 2017
Closed
26 tasks
@sleshchenko sleshchenko self-assigned this Sep 13, 2017
@sleshchenko sleshchenko added status/in-progress This issue has been taken by an engineer and is under active development. and removed status/open-for-dev An issue has had its specification reviewed and confirmed. Waiting for an engineer to take it. labels Sep 13, 2017
@sleshchenko sleshchenko mentioned this issue Sep 13, 2017
Merged
@sleshchenko sleshchenko added status/code-review This issue has a pull request posted for it and is awaiting code review completion by the community. and removed status/in-progress This issue has been taken by an engineer and is under active development. status/code-review This issue has a pull request posted for it and is awaiting code review completion by the community. labels Sep 14, 2017
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees

@sleshchenko sleshchenko

Labels
kind/task Internal things, technical debt, and to-do tasks to be performed.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
2 participants
@garagatyi @sleshchenko