feat(crank): add beta trace command #4849

phisco · 2023-10-19T12:55:54Z

Description of your changes

Partially address #4672
Rework based on the work done by @jbasement on #4751, unfortunately the original branch fell so much behind it was really hard to preserve a meaningful history, so as agreed I've squashed everything.

I have:

Read and followed Crossplane's contribution process.
Run make reviewable to ensure this PR is ready for review.
Added or updated unit tests.
~~Added or updated e2e tests.~~
Linked a PR or a docs tracking issue to document this change.
~~Added backport release-x.y labels to auto-backport this PR.~~

Need help with this checklist? See the cheat sheet.

phisco · 2023-10-19T17:22:26Z

Suggestions about the name of the command are welcome.
describe reminds too much of the kubectl subcommand, but the resemblance stops there, so it could be misleading. The original crossplane cli had trace, so that's an option. Lineage maybe? Given that it's similar to what kube-lineage does?
Any thought?

plumbis · 2023-10-19T18:38:58Z

+1 to trace
-1 to lineage

cmd/crank/beta/beta.go

cmd/crank/beta/describe/describe.go

bobh66 · 2023-10-19T18:47:48Z

Suggestions about the name of the command are welcome. describe reminds too much of the kubectl subcommand, but the resemblance stops there, so it could be misleading. The original crossplane cli had trace, so that's an option. Lineage maybe? Given that it's similar to what kube-lineage does? Any thought?

If the output is the same or close to kubectl lineage then I think lineage makes sense. trace implies a path through a set of things (lines of code, resources, etc) so while that might be good for a list of ownerReferences, for example, I don't think it works for a lineage-like tree.

phisco · 2023-10-20T07:10:16Z

noticed the tree view requires a bit more refinement

phisco · 2023-10-20T08:18:41Z

From the feedbacks here and I've collected irl, sounds like we have some consensus around trace, so if no one is strongly against it we'll go on with that. CC @bobh66

I added back the dot output too as discussed. I kept it simple and decided a set of meaningful labels for each node, here an example:

Down the line we could think of adding a template to let people customise it.

Right now this is only able to handle XRC/XR/MR, we can think of adding Packages and XRDs support down the line.

Piotr1215 · 2023-10-20T10:50:17Z

Could we extend help for the command to also include the usage of the - o dot output? It has a few parameters that users might not know how to handle. For example the fact that verbose outputs the graph source code as well:
go run github.com/crossplane/crossplane/cmd/crank beta describe nopresources.nop.example.org apiextensions-composition-minimal -o dot --verbose | dot -Tpng -o output.png

jbw976

Really great progress @phisco!! I took it for a test spin this morning and found a couple issues that aren't working for my test scenario I wanted to debug with this new command. I also had a bit of trouble with the resource name format.

What do you think about my experience and any potential improvements we can make to smooth it out for other folks new to the command? 😊

cmd/crank/beta/trace/trace.go

cmd/crank/beta/beta.go

cmd/crank/beta/trace/trace.go

jbw976

This is looking pretty good to me @phisco, I really like where this is landing to ship in v1.14 and then we can continue to iterate with more functionality.

I've added a few comments and questions, but I don't think there is anything blocking on my side, so I'm adding an approval and you can finish this PR off as you want 🤩

cmd/crank/beta/trace/internal/printer/dot.go

jbw976 · 2023-10-22T23:55:45Z

cmd/crank/beta/trace/internal/resource/client.go

+	// collect owner references
+	var refs []v1.ObjectReference
+
+	xrc := claim.Unstructured{Unstructured: obj}


are we making an assumption here that the passed in resource is a claim (xrc)? it looks more like we treat it like a claim and see what we get from it, then we treat it like a XR and see what we get out of it. is that correct? 🤔

we see more of that ambiguity further down when we're looking up the connection secrets and we're not sure if the object is a claim or XR. I don't have specific suggestions on anything to change here, or even that anything needs to change, but it feels a bit odd that at multiple points in this function we're not sure what type we're working with. You can choose to do something with that observation or not 😅

yes, I adopted the same approach we are using to build the related resource graph from the e2es, but we could probably make it more explicit by checking the resource labels, I'll give it a shot 👍

jbw976 · 2023-10-22T23:59:18Z

cmd/crank/beta/trace/internal/resource/client.go

+// Copied over from cli-runtime pkg/resource Builder,
+// https://github.com/kubernetes/cli-runtime/blob/9a91d944dd43186c52e0162e12b151b0e460354a/pkg/resource/builder.go#L768
+func (kc *Client) MappingFor(resourceOrKindArg string) (*meta.RESTMapping, error) {
+	// TODO(phisco): actually use the Builder.


is this the type of TODO that needs a tracking issue?

it's more a wish, there is no real need. It would be awesome to be able to leverage the upstream code, but it shouldn't change the end result, so I wouldn't actively track it.

cmd/crank/beta/trace/internal/resource/client_test.go

jbw976 · 2023-10-23T00:01:45Z

cmd/crank/beta/trace/trace.go

+If needed the resource kind can be also specified further,
+'TYPE[.VERSION][.GROUP]', e.g. mykind.example.org.
+
+Examples:


love all these examples, that will be really helpful for folks to use this command effectively!! 😎

cmd/crank/beta/trace/trace.go

turkenh · 2023-10-23T06:36:30Z

Just tested with the latest state with platform-ref-aws:v0.6.0 and XP v1.13.2.

In the beginning, the command failed with:

./_output/bin/darwin_arm64/crank beta trace cluster platform-ref-aws-ht
crossplane: error: cannot get requested resource: couldn't get child resource: couldn't get resource: resource name may not be empty

While I was trying to debug it, it resolved by itself, and started printing the tree. Hence, I don't have much clue about what was wrong before, but enhancing the error message above with some more details could help.

Now, I am seeing a proper output as below:

❯ ./_output/bin/darwin_arm64/crank beta trace cluster platform-ref-aws-ht
NAME                                                                 READY     SYNCED    STATUS
Cluster/platform-ref-aws-ht (default)                                True      True      Available
└─ XCluster/platform-ref-aws-ht-ctk5x                                True      True      Available
   ├─ XNetwork/platform-ref-aws-ht-ctk5x-6lpkx                       True      True      Available
   │  ├─ VPC/platform-ref-aws-ht-ctk5x-fcx5v                         True      True      Available
   │  ├─ InternetGateway/platform-ref-aws-ht-ctk5x-5lt6p             True      True      Available
   │  ├─ Subnet/platform-ref-aws-ht-ctk5x-b98lz                      True      True      Available
   │  ├─ Subnet/platform-ref-aws-ht-ctk5x-6n5j8                      True      True      Available
   │  ├─ Subnet/platform-ref-aws-ht-ctk5x-fp6r9                      True      True      Available
   │  ├─ Subnet/platform-ref-aws-ht-ctk5x-fhwqv                      True      True      Available
   │  ├─ RouteTable/platform-ref-aws-ht-ctk5x-f9x5v                  True      True      Available
   │  ├─ Route/platform-ref-aws-ht-ctk5x-qr9db                       True      True      Available
   │  ├─ MainRouteTableAssociation/platform-ref-aws-ht-ctk5x-64mg4   True      True      Available
   │  ├─ RouteTableAssociation/platform-ref-aws-ht-ctk5x-cx9ns       True      True      Available
   │  ├─ RouteTableAssociation/platform-ref-aws-ht-ctk5x-vnvfl       True      True      Available
   │  ├─ RouteTableAssociation/platform-ref-aws-ht-ctk5x-sr6g7       True      True      Available
   │  ├─ RouteTableAssociation/platform-ref-aws-ht-ctk5x-b6zmz       True      True      Available
   │  ├─ SecurityGroup/platform-ref-aws-ht-ctk5x-q5nx7               True      True      Available
   │  ├─ SecurityGroupRule/platform-ref-aws-ht-ctk5x-lgpnx           True      True      Available
   │  └─ SecurityGroupRule/platform-ref-aws-ht-ctk5x-xsqlb           True      True      Available
   ├─ XEKS/platform-ref-aws-ht-ctk5x-svcm2                           True      True      Available
   │  ├─ Role/platform-ref-aws-ht-ctk5x-5ffp2                        True      True      Available
   │  ├─ RolePolicyAttachment/platform-ref-aws-ht-ctk5x-rwdmg        True      True      Available
   │  ├─ Cluster/platform-ref-aws-ht-ctk5x-59f5j                     True      True      Available
   │  ├─ ClusterAuth/platform-ref-aws-ht-ctk5x-pwkr9                 True      True      Available
   │  ├─ Role/platform-ref-aws-ht-ctk5x-hxtz2                        True      True      Available
   │  ├─ RolePolicyAttachment/platform-ref-aws-ht-ctk5x-phvxp        True      True      Available
   │  ├─ RolePolicyAttachment/platform-ref-aws-ht-ctk5x-pr272        True      True      Available
   │  ├─ RolePolicyAttachment/platform-ref-aws-ht-ctk5x-hglzh        True      True      Available
   │  ├─ NodeGroup/platform-ref-aws-ht-ctk5x-mkfrv                   True      True      Available
   │  ├─ OpenIDConnectProvider/platform-ref-aws-ht-ctk5x-mrt9x       True      True      Available
   │  └─ ProviderConfig/platform-ref-aws-ht                          Unknown   Unknown
   └─ XServices/platform-ref-aws-ht-ctk5x-lwgg2                      True      True      Available
      ├─ Release/platform-ref-aws-ht-ctk5x-5hh8r                     True      True      Available
      └─ Release/platform-ref-aws-ht-ctk5x-bk7d6                     True      True      Available

The only question is whether we could handle ProviderConfig's better, but I don't have a great solution given we have readiness implemented in Composition and the cli doesn't have access there.

phisco · 2023-10-23T08:07:48Z

@turkenh crossplane: error: cannot get requested resource: couldn't get child resource: couldn't get resource: resource name may not be empty could mean the resource reference in a child resource didn't have a name set when we tried getting it, we know that's something that could happen, so I'll make sure to properly handle it, good call!

cmd/crank/beta/trace/internal/resource/client.go

phisco · 2023-10-23T12:59:15Z

I've added support for EnvironmentConfigs for XRs too, I think it could help with the environment debugging issues we have been discussing, here a really symptomatic example from our E2Es:

go run github.com/crossplane/crossplane/cmd/crank beta trace sqlinstance.example.org example
NAME                                            READY   SYNCED   STATUS
SQLInstance/example (default)                   True    True     Available
└─ XSQLInstance/example-gpwvk                   True    True     Available
   ├─ NopResource/example-gpwvk-ck9d9           True    True
   ├─ EnvironmentConfig/example-environment-1
   ├─ EnvironmentConfig/example-environment-2
   └─ EnvironmentConfig/example-environment-3

WDYT @jbw976?

EDIT: discussing with @turkenh we agreed it didn't make much sense to show selected EnvironmentConfigs as it would be confusing if the selected composition was also creating EnvironmentConfigs, as they would all show on the same level.

turkenh · 2023-10-23T13:34:29Z

Tested again with the latest master of platform-ref-aws and Crossplane from this commit.

First of all, great work 💪 Thank you both @phisco and @jbasement! It will really be a game-changer in terms of debugging complex composites!

This is what I get just before being ready, see how easy to see why the claim is not ready 🤩

❯ ./_output/bin/darwin_arm64/crank beta trace cluster platform-ref-aws-ht
NAME                                                                 READY     SYNCED    STATUS
Cluster/platform-ref-aws-ht (default)                                False     True      Waiting: ...resource claim is waiting for composite resource to become Ready
└─ XCluster/platform-ref-aws-ht-x22s4                                False     True      Creating: Unready resources: compositeClusterEKS
   ├─ XNetwork/platform-ref-aws-ht-x22s4-k6v5r                       True      True      Available
   │  ├─ VPC/platform-ref-aws-ht-x22s4-dflgv                         True      True      Available
   │  ├─ InternetGateway/platform-ref-aws-ht-x22s4-6j95q             True      True      Available
   │  ├─ Subnet/platform-ref-aws-ht-x22s4-ndgzp                      True      True      Available
   │  ├─ Subnet/platform-ref-aws-ht-x22s4-66n5t                      True      True      Available
   │  ├─ Subnet/platform-ref-aws-ht-x22s4-z5k8k                      True      True      Available
   │  ├─ Subnet/platform-ref-aws-ht-x22s4-hc7h2                      True      True      Available
   │  ├─ RouteTable/platform-ref-aws-ht-x22s4-6q2g6                  True      True      Available
   │  ├─ Route/platform-ref-aws-ht-x22s4-66prw                       True      True      Available
   │  ├─ MainRouteTableAssociation/platform-ref-aws-ht-x22s4-jttw2   True      True      Available
   │  ├─ RouteTableAssociation/platform-ref-aws-ht-x22s4-zwnb9       True      True      Available
   │  ├─ RouteTableAssociation/platform-ref-aws-ht-x22s4-8qq4z       True      True      Available
   │  ├─ RouteTableAssociation/platform-ref-aws-ht-x22s4-fgqtn       True      True      Available
   │  ├─ RouteTableAssociation/platform-ref-aws-ht-x22s4-r7tfz       True      True      Available
   │  ├─ SecurityGroup/platform-ref-aws-ht-x22s4-gzs7p               True      True      Available
   │  ├─ SecurityGroupRule/platform-ref-aws-ht-x22s4-h6wbx           True      True      Available
   │  └─ SecurityGroupRule/platform-ref-aws-ht-x22s4-znrb7           True      True      Available
   ├─ XEKS/platform-ref-aws-ht-x22s4-554vh                           False     True      Creating: Unready resources: ebsCsiAddon
   │  ├─ Role/platform-ref-aws-ht-x22s4-gvs2d                        True      True      Available
   │  ├─ RolePolicyAttachment/platform-ref-aws-ht-x22s4-5jgs8        True      True      Available
   │  ├─ Cluster/platform-ref-aws-ht-x22s4-p7z6j                     True      True      Available
   │  ├─ ClusterAuth/platform-ref-aws-ht-x22s4-q67wj                 True      True      Available
   │  ├─ Role/platform-ref-aws-ht-x22s4-fhld5                        True      True      Available
   │  ├─ RolePolicyAttachment/platform-ref-aws-ht-x22s4-c5484        True      True      Available
   │  ├─ RolePolicyAttachment/platform-ref-aws-ht-x22s4-4wwzv        True      True      Available
   │  ├─ RolePolicyAttachment/platform-ref-aws-ht-x22s4-jsk74        True      True      Available
   │  ├─ RolePolicyAttachment/platform-ref-aws-ht-x22s4-tl6fs        True      True      Available
   │  ├─ NodeGroup/platform-ref-aws-ht-x22s4-wx9x6                   True      True      Available
   │  ├─ Addon/platform-ref-aws-ht-x22s4-prlx8                       False     True      Creating
   │  ├─ OpenIDConnectProvider/platform-ref-aws-ht-x22s4-bcccr       True      True      Available
   │  ├─ ProviderConfig/platform-ref-aws-ht                          Unknown   Unknown
   │  ├─ ProviderConfig/platform-ref-aws-ht                          Unknown   Unknown
   │  ├─ Object/platform-ref-aws-ht-irsa-settings                    True      True      Available
   │  └─ Object/platform-ref-aws-ht-aws-auth                         True      True      Available
   ├─ XServices/platform-ref-aws-ht-x22s4-gpzd2                      True      True      Available
   │  └─ Release/platform-ref-aws-ht-x22s4-6rgpx                     True      True      Available
   └─ Usage/platform-ref-aws-ht-x22s4-s8c9k                          True      Unknown   Available

And once it is ready, this is what I getting:

❯ ./_output/bin/darwin_arm64/crank beta trace cluster platform-ref-aws-ht
NAME                                                                 READY     SYNCED    STATUS
Cluster/platform-ref-aws-ht (default)                                True      True      Available
└─ XCluster/platform-ref-aws-ht-x22s4                                True      True      Available
   ├─ XNetwork/platform-ref-aws-ht-x22s4-k6v5r                       True      True      Available
   │  ├─ VPC/platform-ref-aws-ht-x22s4-dflgv                         True      True      Available
   │  ├─ InternetGateway/platform-ref-aws-ht-x22s4-6j95q             True      True      Available
   │  ├─ Subnet/platform-ref-aws-ht-x22s4-ndgzp                      True      True      Available
   │  ├─ Subnet/platform-ref-aws-ht-x22s4-66n5t                      True      True      Available
   │  ├─ Subnet/platform-ref-aws-ht-x22s4-z5k8k                      True      True      Available
   │  ├─ Subnet/platform-ref-aws-ht-x22s4-hc7h2                      True      True      Available
   │  ├─ RouteTable/platform-ref-aws-ht-x22s4-6q2g6                  True      True      Available
   │  ├─ Route/platform-ref-aws-ht-x22s4-66prw                       True      True      Available
   │  ├─ MainRouteTableAssociation/platform-ref-aws-ht-x22s4-jttw2   True      True      Available
   │  ├─ RouteTableAssociation/platform-ref-aws-ht-x22s4-zwnb9       True      True      Available
   │  ├─ RouteTableAssociation/platform-ref-aws-ht-x22s4-8qq4z       True      True      Available
   │  ├─ RouteTableAssociation/platform-ref-aws-ht-x22s4-fgqtn       True      True      Available
   │  ├─ RouteTableAssociation/platform-ref-aws-ht-x22s4-r7tfz       True      True      Available
   │  ├─ SecurityGroup/platform-ref-aws-ht-x22s4-gzs7p               True      True      Available
   │  ├─ SecurityGroupRule/platform-ref-aws-ht-x22s4-h6wbx           True      True      Available
   │  └─ SecurityGroupRule/platform-ref-aws-ht-x22s4-znrb7           True      True      Available
   ├─ XEKS/platform-ref-aws-ht-x22s4-554vh                           True      True      Available
   │  ├─ Role/platform-ref-aws-ht-x22s4-gvs2d                        True      True      Available
   │  ├─ RolePolicyAttachment/platform-ref-aws-ht-x22s4-5jgs8        True      True      Available
   │  ├─ Cluster/platform-ref-aws-ht-x22s4-p7z6j                     True      True      Available
   │  ├─ ClusterAuth/platform-ref-aws-ht-x22s4-q67wj                 True      True      Available
   │  ├─ Role/platform-ref-aws-ht-x22s4-fhld5                        True      True      Available
   │  ├─ RolePolicyAttachment/platform-ref-aws-ht-x22s4-c5484        True      True      Available
   │  ├─ RolePolicyAttachment/platform-ref-aws-ht-x22s4-4wwzv        True      True      Available
   │  ├─ RolePolicyAttachment/platform-ref-aws-ht-x22s4-jsk74        True      True      Available
   │  ├─ RolePolicyAttachment/platform-ref-aws-ht-x22s4-tl6fs        True      True      Available
   │  ├─ NodeGroup/platform-ref-aws-ht-x22s4-wx9x6                   True      True      Available
   │  ├─ Addon/platform-ref-aws-ht-x22s4-prlx8                       True      True      Available
   │  ├─ OpenIDConnectProvider/platform-ref-aws-ht-x22s4-bcccr       True      True      Available
   │  ├─ ProviderConfig/platform-ref-aws-ht                          Unknown   Unknown
   │  ├─ ProviderConfig/platform-ref-aws-ht                          Unknown   Unknown
   │  ├─ Object/platform-ref-aws-ht-irsa-settings                    True      True      Available
   │  └─ Object/platform-ref-aws-ht-aws-auth                         True      True      Available
   ├─ XServices/platform-ref-aws-ht-x22s4-gpzd2                      True      True      Available
   │  └─ Release/platform-ref-aws-ht-x22s4-6rgpx                     True      True      Available
   └─ Usage/platform-ref-aws-ht-x22s4-s8c9k                          True      Unknown   Available

The only improvement I can think of is, a better handling for Unknown's. I'd prefer to see them as below instead, but I am not sure if it makes sense for other cases:

   │  ├─ OpenIDConnectProvider/platform-ref-aws-ht-x22s4-bcccr       True      True      Available
   │  ├─ ProviderConfig/platform-ref-aws-ht                          -         -      
   │  ├─ ProviderConfig/platform-ref-aws-ht                          -         -      
   │  ├─ Object/platform-ref-aws-ht-irsa-settings                    True      True      Available
   │  └─ Object/platform-ref-aws-ht-aws-auth                         True      True      Available
   ├─ XServices/platform-ref-aws-ht-x22s4-gpzd2                      True      True      Available
   │  └─ Release/platform-ref-aws-ht-x22s4-6rgpx                     True      True      Available
   └─ Usage/platform-ref-aws-ht-x22s4-s8c9k                          True      -         Available

phisco · 2023-10-23T13:48:40Z

@turkenh, awesome!

About the Unknowns, we can definitely replace them with -, however when you see Unknown it means the resource actually has a condition status set to Unknown, not that the status is an empty string. I think there is value in knowing which case it is.

So, should we map empty condition status, Unknowns or both to -?

turkenh · 2023-10-23T13:54:43Z

I think both resources I am interested in here, ProviderConfigs and Usages, don't have those conditions at all.

So, seeing Unknown if the condition status is set to Unknown but seeing - when the resource doesn't have that condition at all feels like a good solution.

phisco · 2023-10-23T13:59:35Z

I think both resources I am interested in here, ProviderConfigs and Usages, don't have those conditions at all.

Then it shouldn't show them as Unknown here:

   │  ├─ ProviderConfig/platform-ref-aws-ht                          Unknown   Unknown

phisco · 2023-10-23T14:42:32Z

I thought the Unknown was actually coming from the resource status, but turns out the defaulting was coming from the ConditionedStatus.GetCondition, so I mapped it to - as it makes the view more compact. 🎉 I think I can squash everything and we can get it merged, WDYT @turkenh @jbw976?

jbw976 · 2023-10-23T15:32:34Z

The Unknown discussion seems to have ended up at a good place! With my simple test scenario, I thought the - for Ready on the DatabaseInstance was incorrect, but looking further at the resource, it really doesn't have a Ready condition set. So it's working as expected and makes sense for all scenarios, including Usage and ProviderConfig that don't have a Ready status condition. Ship it!!

DatabaseInstance shows - for Ready:

❯ crank beta trace acmedatabases acme-db-prod -s
NAME                                                                    READY   SYNCED   STATUS
AcmeDatabase/acme-db-prod (default)                                     False   True     Waiting: ...resource claim is waiting for composite resource to become Ready
└─ XAcmeDatabase/acme-db-prod-7sc7m                                     False   True     Creating
   ├─ DatabaseInstance/acme-db-prod-7sc7m-2ggn9                         -       False    ReconcileError: ...ls: cannot get credentials secret: Secret "gcp-secret" not found
   └─ Secret/5d2b9592-d3c7-4dc5-b27c-67a3c10c1b45 (crossplane-system)

But that's OK, it doesn't have a Ready status condition 😊

❯ k get DatabaseInstance/acme-db-prod-7sc7m-2ggn9 -o json | jq '.status'
{
  "atProvider": {},
  "conditions": [
    {
      "lastTransitionTime": "2023-10-21T14:38:18Z",
      "message": "connect failed: cannot get terraform setup: cannot extract JSON key credentials: cannot get credentials secret: Secret \"gcp-secret\" not found",
      "reason": "ReconcileError",
      "status": "False",
      "type": "Synced"
    }
  ]
}

turkenh

Looking good, just a few nits!

turkenh · 2023-10-24T10:30:45Z

cmd/crank/beta/trace/internal/printer/default_test.go

+   │  ├─ User/test-resource-child-1-bucket-hash        False   True     SomethingWrongHappened: Error with bucket child 1   
+   │  ├─ User/test-resource-child-mid-bucket-hash      True    False    CantSync: Sync error with bucket child mid          
+   │  └─ User/test-resource-child-2-bucket-hash        False   True     SomethingWrongHappened: Error with bucket child 2   
+   │     └─ User/test-resource-child-2-1-bucket-hash   -       True                                                         


nit: Should we still have a test for the real Unknowns :)

done: f8998ce

cmd/crank/beta/trace/internal/printer/default.go

cmd/crank/beta/trace/trace.go

Co-authored-by: jbasement <j.keller@celonis.com> Co-authored-by: Philippe Scorsolini <p.scorsolini@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Philippe Scorsolini <p.scorsolini@gmail.com>

Signed-off-by: Philippe Scorsolini <p.scorsolini@gmail.com>

phisco requested review from negz and a team as code owners October 19, 2023 12:55

phisco requested review from ytsarev and turkenh October 19, 2023 12:55

phisco force-pushed the feature/cli-add-describe-command-review-rebase branch from 7aa7104 to 7452c0c Compare October 19, 2023 13:06

jbasement mentioned this pull request Oct 19, 2023

feat(crank): add describe command #4751

Closed

5 tasks

plumbis reviewed Oct 19, 2023

View reviewed changes

cmd/crank/beta/beta.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

cmd/crank/beta/describe/describe.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

phisco force-pushed the feature/cli-add-describe-command-review-rebase branch from 7452c0c to e357a5a Compare October 20, 2023 07:27

phisco requested a review from a team as a code owner October 20, 2023 07:27

phisco requested a review from bobh66 October 20, 2023 07:27

phisco force-pushed the feature/cli-add-describe-command-review-rebase branch 2 times, most recently from ce4b629 to 91096fa Compare October 20, 2023 07:58

phisco changed the title ~~feat(crank): add beta describe command~~ feat(crank): add beta trace command Oct 20, 2023

phisco force-pushed the feature/cli-add-describe-command-review-rebase branch from e96db07 to f16c1f5 Compare October 20, 2023 14:27

jbw976 reviewed Oct 21, 2023

View reviewed changes

cmd/crank/beta/trace/trace.go Show resolved Hide resolved

cmd/crank/beta/beta.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

cmd/crank/beta/trace/trace.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

cmd/crank/beta/trace/trace.go Show resolved Hide resolved

phisco force-pushed the feature/cli-add-describe-command-review-rebase branch 2 times, most recently from bf52bcf to eb1b6d7 Compare October 21, 2023 22:04

jbw976 approved these changes Oct 23, 2023

View reviewed changes

phisco force-pushed the feature/cli-add-describe-command-review-rebase branch from 3fe8cc5 to 8bf644b Compare October 23, 2023 08:07

turkenh reviewed Oct 23, 2023

View reviewed changes

cmd/crank/beta/trace/internal/resource/client.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

phisco force-pushed the feature/cli-add-describe-command-review-rebase branch from 8416065 to b841d01 Compare October 23, 2023 12:49

turkenh approved these changes Oct 24, 2023

View reviewed changes

feat(crank): add beta describe command

813b7fe

Co-authored-by: jbasement <j.keller@celonis.com> Co-authored-by: Philippe Scorsolini <p.scorsolini@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Philippe Scorsolini <p.scorsolini@gmail.com>

phisco force-pushed the feature/cli-add-describe-command-review-rebase branch from f8998ce to 9b90e6f Compare October 24, 2023 11:27

feat: rename to trace and further improvements

ac99fe0

Signed-off-by: Philippe Scorsolini <p.scorsolini@gmail.com>

phisco force-pushed the feature/cli-add-describe-command-review-rebase branch from 9b90e6f to ac99fe0 Compare October 24, 2023 11:27

phisco merged commit 00aad9c into crossplane:master Oct 24, 2023
15 of 16 checks passed

phisco mentioned this pull request Oct 24, 2023

trace command - a kube-lineage like view for debugging #4672

Closed

phisco mentioned this pull request Nov 1, 2023

Promote trace crossplane CLI subcommand to GA #4946

Open

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

feat(crank): add beta trace command #4849

feat(crank): add beta trace command #4849

phisco commented Oct 19, 2023 •

edited

phisco commented Oct 19, 2023 •

edited

plumbis commented Oct 19, 2023

bobh66 commented Oct 19, 2023

phisco commented Oct 20, 2023

phisco commented Oct 20, 2023

Piotr1215 commented Oct 20, 2023

jbw976 left a comment

jbw976 left a comment

jbw976 Oct 22, 2023

phisco Oct 23, 2023

jbw976 Oct 22, 2023

phisco Oct 23, 2023

jbw976 Oct 23, 2023

turkenh commented Oct 23, 2023 •

edited

phisco commented Oct 23, 2023

phisco commented Oct 23, 2023 •

edited

turkenh commented Oct 23, 2023

phisco commented Oct 23, 2023

turkenh commented Oct 23, 2023

phisco commented Oct 23, 2023

phisco commented Oct 23, 2023

jbw976 commented Oct 23, 2023

turkenh left a comment

turkenh Oct 24, 2023

phisco Oct 24, 2023

feat(crank): add beta trace command #4849

feat(crank): add beta trace command #4849

Conversation

phisco commented Oct 19, 2023 • edited

Description of your changes

phisco commented Oct 19, 2023 • edited

plumbis commented Oct 19, 2023

bobh66 commented Oct 19, 2023

phisco commented Oct 20, 2023

phisco commented Oct 20, 2023

Piotr1215 commented Oct 20, 2023

jbw976 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

jbw976 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

jbw976 Oct 22, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

phisco Oct 23, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

jbw976 Oct 22, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

phisco Oct 23, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

jbw976 Oct 23, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

turkenh commented Oct 23, 2023 • edited

phisco commented Oct 23, 2023

phisco commented Oct 23, 2023 • edited

turkenh commented Oct 23, 2023

phisco commented Oct 23, 2023

turkenh commented Oct 23, 2023

phisco commented Oct 23, 2023

phisco commented Oct 23, 2023

jbw976 commented Oct 23, 2023

turkenh left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

turkenh Oct 24, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

phisco Oct 24, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

phisco commented Oct 19, 2023 •

edited

phisco commented Oct 19, 2023 •

edited

turkenh commented Oct 23, 2023 •

edited

phisco commented Oct 23, 2023 •

edited