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

Updates to roadmap for 1.11 and 1.12 and new upcoming features section (WIP) #5824

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Nov 17, 2018

Conversation

geojaz
Copy link
Member

@geojaz geojaz commented Sep 23, 2018

Not sure why I'm running into weird test issues when this is all docs. Sorting it out so we can get merged...

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files. labels Sep 23, 2018
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Sep 23, 2018
@rdrgmnzs
Copy link
Contributor

One quick comment otherwise looks good.

ROADMAP.md Outdated

# HISTORICAL
* Full support for Kubernetes 1.
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Is this supposed to be 1.11?

ROADMAP.md Outdated
* 1.11 alpha.1 at release of kops 1.10
* 1.11 beta.1 at release of k8s 1.11
* 1.12 alpha.1 at release of kops 1.11 etc
In practive, sometimes this means that kops can release months after the release of Kubernetes. We sincerely hope that is not the case, but it happens. We also realize that this is not an entirely determininstic release process, particularly with respect to networking plugins that are continually in development. We understand this is in some ways not ideal, but the community decided to continue down this path and in lieu of quickly releasing and iterating on patch versions, to release alpha and beta versions early and often. We are still working on improving this process as seen below.

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

In practive should be In practice

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Might be worth setting a line-length and adding line breaks.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

typo: deterministic

ROADMAP.md Outdated

* Documentation revamp that is closer to k8s.io: Stories and walkthroughs of common scenarios, restructure and update information
* Additional cloud providor support: spotinst, aliyun
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

typo: provider

@geojaz
Copy link
Member Author

geojaz commented Sep 24, 2018

Thanks for the feedback! I think I pushed an incorrect version. Let's see how this one does...

@willthames
Copy link
Contributor

willthames commented Sep 24, 2018

@geojaz this now has some very unexpected files in it! Try a git pull --rebase

Edit: I tried git rebase master and that wasn't enough:

git rebase master
git reset HEAD^ .
git commit --amend --no-edit ROADMAP.md
git checkout .

should do the trick

particularly with some networking plugins that are supported by kops but themselves still under development. We discussed
this challenge in kops office hours in March 2018, and the consensus was that we want to keep this, but that we should release
alphas & betas much earlier so that users can try out new kubernetes versions on release day.
However, kops 1.N.x does NOT support Kubernetes 1.N+1.x. Sometimes you get lucky and kops 1.N will technically install a later version of Kubernetes, but we cannot guarantee or support this situation. As always, we recommend waiting for the official release of kops with minor version >= the version of Kubernetes you wish to install. Please see the [compatibility matrix](README.md#Compatibility_Matrix) for further questions.
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I still suggest wrapping lines at a reasonable line width (there seemed to be better line wrapping before this change)

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@willthames I appreciate the suggestions. My git-fu is apparently failing me. I've ended up all turned around due to test flakes yesterday and now I'm in a weird place :) rebasing and squashing and we'll see if we can get this back on track!

As for the line wraps- I've generally let the browser/github deal with that. Is this paragraph displaying in a strange way for you? It looks reasonable to me- but if you can help me improve it, please do. I'm open to suggestions, I just don't know what you're looking for exactly. Maybe a screenshot would help!
Thanks again

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@geojaz - shorter lines tend to (but don't always) make for smaller diffs and simpler reviews (the fewer words on a line, the easier it is to say which line has the typo).

It's also slightly easier to get to a word in a text editor when using the keyboard as you can get to the right line first and then the right word.

It's displaying fine in github - I've definitely come across times where that's not the case (I seem to recall bitbucket doesn't do so well, but that's not an issue for this repo)

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@willthames Cool, I'm picking up what your putting down... understood. i'll come back to this tomorrow with fresh eyes and see what I can do for ya.

@geojaz geojaz added cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. and removed cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. labels Sep 24, 2018
@geojaz geojaz mentioned this pull request Sep 24, 2018
Copy link
Contributor

@mikesplain mikesplain left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is great, thanks for your hard work on this @geojaz!

@justinsb
Copy link
Member

/lgtm
/retest

Thanks @geojaz .... we might have to tweak some of the 1.11 goals (thinking about etcd3) but this is much better

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Nov 17, 2018
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: geojaz, justinsb

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:

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

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot merged commit 28d871f into kubernetes:master Nov 17, 2018
@geojaz geojaz deleted the roadmap branch November 20, 2019 20:48
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

7 participants