-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 451
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
Implement of GEP-995 #2985
Implement of GEP-995 #2985
Conversation
6dbfb6c
to
199242c
Compare
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.
Generally looks good to me,
One nit: the GEP mentions
"This format for the name
field of route rules differs from the pattern adopted for the SectionName
type, which was thought for specifying mainly DNS subdomain names (RFC 1123), due to its use in the gateway listeners originally"
So although it is just a string, using v1.SectionName is a bit confusing. Maybe a dedicated type or simply a string?
Not sure what the best path is here, but I guess starting with |
@guicassolato or @howardjohn I know this GEP is already essentially in scope for v1.2, but can one of you take a minute to leave a comment on #3103 so we make sure we're tracking it? |
Now that #3166 is merged I think this is unblocked. Let me know if there are any changes needed. |
689d741
to
12a26fd
Compare
@robscott can you take another look? |
PR needs rebase. Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository. |
12a26fd
to
d325715
Compare
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.
Thanks @howardjohn!
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.
Thanks @howardjohn! LGTM once tests pass.
/approve
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: howardjohn, robscott 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 |
8fcde39
to
0eb6d62
Compare
0eb6d62
to
95daa44
Compare
95daa44
to
0643c0d
Compare
ca0faf6
to
008ffdb
Compare
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.
Thanks, @howardjohn!
/lgtm
What type of PR is this?
/kind gep
What this PR does / why we need it:
Implements GEP-995
GEP: #2593 (merged)
Docs: #2946 (merged)
Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
Fixes #
Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?:
Release note was in 2593