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

Deprecate the feature gates associated with catalog content CRs #115

Closed
everettraven opened this issue Jul 17, 2023 · 3 comments · Fixed by #141
Closed

Deprecate the feature gates associated with catalog content CRs #115

everettraven opened this issue Jul 17, 2023 · 3 comments · Fixed by #141
Milestone

Comments

@everettraven
Copy link
Collaborator

As part of implementing the RFC for catalogd's content storage and serving mechanism we are moving away from serving catalog contents via CustomResources. We should deprecate all feature gates related to serving catalog contents via CustomResources and ensure that the default method of serving the catalog contents is the HTTP server.

@anik120
Copy link
Collaborator

anik120 commented Jul 18, 2023

Do we need to deprecate? We're in alpha, I think we can just remove whatever we want (and tell clients when to bump whenever we're ready to get bumped for consumers)

@everettraven
Copy link
Collaborator Author

This is a fair point. I was making an assumption that it would be better to deprecate based on the fact that we added feature gates for the API change from Package + BundleMetadata to CatalogMetadata CRs but if we would prefer to just remove this functionality all together that's fine by me.

@joelanford
Copy link
Member

I think it's okay to remove when we're ready without a deprecation window.

Regardless, we should introduce the new functionality before deprecating or removing the old functionality. And we probably shouldn't remove the old functionality until:

  1. Other known consumers (e.g. operator-controller) have been updated to support the new functionality.
  2. The experience of a user browsing the catalog contents is reasonably on-par with the old functionality.

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

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

3 participants