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

The migration resource should be cluster-scoped #26

Closed
caesarxuchao opened this issue Mar 20, 2019 · 4 comments
Closed

The migration resource should be cluster-scoped #26

caesarxuchao opened this issue Mar 20, 2019 · 4 comments
Assignees

Comments

@caesarxuchao
Copy link
Member

A migration object represent a request to migrate a resource. There is no use case to have migration objects scattered in namespaces.

/assign

@fejta-bot
Copy link

Issues go stale after 90d of inactivity.
Mark the issue as fresh with /remove-lifecycle stale.
Stale issues rot after an additional 30d of inactivity and eventually close.

If this issue is safe to close now please do so with /close.

Send feedback to sig-testing, kubernetes/test-infra and/or fejta.
/lifecycle stale

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the lifecycle/stale Denotes an issue or PR has remained open with no activity and has become stale. label Jun 18, 2019
@caesarxuchao
Copy link
Member Author

/remove-lifecycle stale

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot removed the lifecycle/stale Denotes an issue or PR has remained open with no activity and has become stale. label Jun 18, 2019
@caesarxuchao
Copy link
Member Author

Another reason to make the StorageVersionMigration API cluster-scoped: if there are two migration requests in two namespaces for the same resource, it's just confusing.

@caesarxuchao
Copy link
Member Author

Fixed by #37

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants