Docs: update syncer.md to make the syncer dev steps a bit clear for the local kcp kind-based syncer scenario.

[merlante]

Summary

Make the syncer dev steps a bit clear for the local kcp kind-based syncer scenario.

Related issue(s)

No related issue

[openshift-ci]

Hi @merlante. Thanks for your PR.

I'm waiting for a kcp-dev member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with /ok-to-test on its own line. Until that is done, I will not automatically test new commits in this PR, but the usual testing commands by org members will still work. Regular contributors should join the org to skip this step.

Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the ok-to-test label.

I understand the commands that are listed here.

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/test-infra repository.

[davidfestal]

Very nice. Just did some small comments.

[davidfestal]

Suggested change

	$ kubectl kcp workspace create my-org --enter
	$ kubectl kcp workspace create my-workloads --enter

[merlante]

I have applied this change. The only issue is that "my-org" is used elsewhere on this page, and it is termed an organisation (as opposed to a second workspace as you have advised) in those sections. I decided to leave "my-org" in the steps in those other sections because a) those sections do not (yet) use the 2 workspace (locations/workloads) setup, so it might be confusing to see "my-locations" without reference to a "my-workloads" and b) I didn't really want to change those steps without testing them and ensuring I wasn't breaking something.

Anyway, let me know if you are happy to go with the suggested changes or whether you think it would be better to wait for the references to "my-org" to be removed and the 2 workspace format put in in all sections in the same PR. (My preference is just to go ahead and come back to it again later.)

[davidfestal]

My preference is just to go ahead and come back to it again later

I agree with that as well.

[merlante]

@davidfestal I think this PR is ready unless you want to consider what I said in my last comment.

[openshift-ci]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: davidfestal

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:

• docs/OWNERS [davidfestal]

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment