-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 225
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
Target selectors docs #2534
Target selectors docs #2534
Conversation
site/book/04-using-functions/01-declarative-function-execution.md
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
site/book/04-using-functions/01-declarative-function-execution.md
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
site/book/04-using-functions/01-declarative-function-execution.md
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
site/book/04-using-functions/01-declarative-function-execution.md
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
site/book/04-using-functions/01-declarative-function-execution.md
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
site/book/04-using-functions/01-declarative-function-execution.md
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
site/book/04-using-functions/01-declarative-function-execution.md
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
site/book/04-using-functions/01-declarative-function-execution.md
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
b8f99f0
to
a64b67c
Compare
site/book/04-using-functions/01-declarative-function-execution.md
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
site/book/04-using-functions/01-declarative-function-execution.md
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
site/book/04-using-functions/01-declarative-function-execution.md
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
site/book/04-using-functions/01-declarative-function-execution.md
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
site/book/04-using-functions/01-declarative-function-execution.md
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
site/book/04-using-functions/01-declarative-function-execution.md
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
site/book/04-using-functions/01-declarative-function-execution.md
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
site/book/04-using-functions/01-declarative-function-execution.md
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
site/book/04-using-functions/01-declarative-function-execution.md
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
f180e78
to
a8244f8
Compare
site/book/04-using-functions/01-declarative-function-execution.md
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
site/book/04-using-functions/01-declarative-function-execution.md
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
site/book/04-using-functions/01-declarative-function-execution.md
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
site/book/04-using-functions/01-declarative-function-execution.md
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
site/book/04-using-functions/02-imperative-function-execution.md
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
9b0b212
to
3c39a3e
Compare
5452541
to
9044223
Compare
9044223
to
9db25d3
Compare
4. `namespace`: `metadata.namespace` field of resources to be selected. | ||
5. `packagePath`: [Package identifier] of resources to be selected. Examples values: | ||
- `.` - selects resources in current package excluding resources in subpackages of current package. | ||
- `mysql` - selects resources in the `mysql` subpackage excluding resources of nested subpackages of `mysql`. |
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.
I find this counter-intuitive. I expected specifying mysql
would include its subpackages. It's probably a more common use case to want to select the entire package hierarchy under mysql
, no? With this model, how do you specify that? Is the thinking that there'll be a wildcard syntax?
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.
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.
We discussed about this and the point is about the default behavior and what makes it more intuitive to users. How about making what you mentioned a default behavior. If users wants to specifically exclude subpackages we can include a new field called excludeSubpackages
.
So shall I reimplement this to make it package
instead of packagePath
and accept full package identifiers with no wild cards support ? Where default behavior is to include all the subpackages?
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.
To unblock the rest of the feature, you can leave packagePath
out of the documentation, and address it separately. Design discussions are better done in a design doc where you can evaluate the overall UX and consider alternatives. There's also a related discussion about globbing support across all matchers. target
field in Kustomize patch support wildcards, has this been discussed anywhere?
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.
So closing the loop here, @phanimarupaka and me had an offline discussion about it. We agree the current behavior is unintuitive, So we are going to disable packagePath
selector for now and re-introduce it with along with subpackage exclusion functionality later.
site/book/04-using-functions/01-declarative-function-execution.md
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
site/book/04-using-functions/01-declarative-function-execution.md
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
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.
Approved after removing packagePath and following up on open questions.
No description provided.