Add docs for KEP 4216: Image pull per runtime class

[kiashok]

Placeholder for KEP 4216: https://github.com/kubernetes/enhancements/tree/master/keps/sig-node/4216-image-pull-per-runtime-class which has been accepted for k8s 1.29

[netlify]

✅ Pull request preview available for checking

Built without sensitive environment variables

Name	Link
🔨 Latest commit	10a984d
🔍 Latest deploy log	https://app.netlify.com/sites/kubernetes-io-main-staging/deploys/655cf8bd541aa4000820b25f
😎 Deploy Preview	https://deploy-preview-43541--kubernetes-io-main-staging.netlify.app
📱 Preview on mobile	Toggle QR Code... Use your smartphone camera to open QR code link.

---

To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify site configuration.

[katcosgrove]

Hi, @kiashok! v1.29 Docs Lead here. Please take a look at Documenting for a release - PR Ready for Review to get your PR ready for review before Tuesday 14th November 2023. Thank you!

[katcosgrove]

Hi, @kiashok! Just dropping by to remind you that the deadline for docs PRs to be ready for review is tomorrow, November 14. Is there anything we can help you with to get this PR ready?

[kiashok]

Hi, @kiashok! Just dropping by to remind you that the deadline for docs PRs to be ready for review is tomorrow, November 14. Is there anything we can help you with to get this PR ready?

I'll send one out soon

[kiashok]

Hi, @kiashok! Just dropping by to remind you that the deadline for docs PRs to be ready for review is tomorrow, November 14. Is there anything we can help you with to get this PR ready?

I'll send one out soon

I think it is not a good idea to have a k8s doc change for the alpha changes of this KEP as implementation is pending on container runtime side. Even if the feature gate is on, container runtimes aren't going to be really honoring the runtime handler that kubelet passes down. Hence I think at this stage, a blog post might be more appropriate than a doc change for this KEP.
Created a placeholder PR here for blog post change #43923 . Working on it now and should have it go out early tomorrow.

cc @jsturtevant @marosset @aravindhp @mikebrow

[k8s-ci-robot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by:
Once this PR has been reviewed and has the lgtm label, please assign kbhawkey for approval. For more information see the Kubernetes Code Review Process.

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• content/en/OWNERS

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

[kiashok]

Hi, @kiashok! Just dropping by to remind you that the deadline for docs PRs to be ready for review is tomorrow, November 14. Is there anything we can help you with to get this PR ready?

I'll send one out soon

I think it is not a good idea to have a k8s doc change for the alpha changes of this KEP as implementation is pending on container runtime side. Even if the feature gate is on, container runtimes aren't going to be really honoring the runtime handler that kubelet passes down. Hence I think at this stage, a blog post might be more appropriate than a doc change for this KEP. Created a placeholder PR here for blog post change #43923 . Working on it now and should have it go out early tomorrow.

cc @jsturtevant @marosset @aravindhp @mikebrow

@katcosgrove discussed with @aravindhp and updated this PR with the changes for the feature gate. It would make more sense to add more details about this feature once support for this is added to containerd. Please let me know if this looks ok.

[katcosgrove]

Thank you!

/retitle Add docs for KEP 4216: Image pull per runtime class

[jsturtevant]

Is there a place in the documentation to briefly mention what it will do and mention runtimes may not have implemented it yet? Is that something that is typically done or is this enough while the runtimes catch up?

[marosset]

Is there a place in the documentation to briefly mention what it will do and mention runtimes may not have implemented it yet? Is that something that is typically done or is this enough while the runtimes catch up?

In the past (for SIG-windows) if there are significant user-facing behaviors we've added documentation to k8s.io explaining the new functionality while also stating that container runtime changes are needed.

In this case I don't think the user-facing behavior is significant enough to add such documentation while the feature in in alpha but we should definitely add some documentation before going to beta

[kiashok]

Is there a place in the documentation to briefly mention what it will do and mention runtimes may not have implemented it yet? Is that something that is typically done or is this enough while the runtimes catch up?

https://github.com/kubernetes/website/blob/main/content/en/docs/concepts/containers/images.md this could be one of the places that could hold it. But since none of the container runtimes have implemented it and we don't know what feedback we might get after containerd implementation goes in (may or may not change some behavior on kubelet) so I thought it would be good to add in such a wide user facing doc once we are able to test this e2e after containerd changes are checked in.

[kiashok]

Is there a place in the documentation to briefly mention what it will do and mention runtimes may not have implemented it yet? Is that something that is typically done or is this enough while the runtimes catch up?

In the past (for SIG-windows) if there are significant user-facing behaviors we've added documentation to k8s.io explaining the new functionality while also stating that container runtime changes are needed.

In this case I don't think the user-facing behavior is significant enough to add such documentation while the feature in in alpha but we should definitely add some documentation before going to beta

yeah I agree

[sftim]

/remove-area blog

[katcosgrove]

Hi, @kiashok! Kubernetes v1.29 Docs Lead here. Just a reminder that the deadline to have this PR reviewed and merged is Tuesday, 28 November. Let me know if you need any help!

[kiashok]

Hi, @kiashok! Kubernetes v1.29 Docs Lead here. Just a reminder that the deadline to have this PR reviewed and merged is Tuesday, 28 November. Let me know if you need any help!

@katcosgrove As discussed in this PR, these are all the changes needed for this KEP at this stage as there are no significant changes and no container runtime supports the changes as yet. I am waiting for review on this PR. Could you please help assign doc reviewers? Or should it be the folks who signed off on the initial kubelet changes PRs itself?

[sftim]

Placeholder for KEP 4216: https://github.com/kubernetes/enhancements/tree/master/keps/sig-node/4216-image-pull-per-runtime-class which has been accepted for k8s 1.29

@kiakshok, you might want to change the description to make it clear the PR is reviewable.

[jsturtevant]

/lgtm

[k8s-ci-robot]

LGTM label has been added.

Git tree hash: 1bce6f89e24106c5d00117fb0aff1621e96103e7

[dipesh-rawat]

/sig windows
/sig node

[dipesh-rawat]

@kiashok Considering these changes are geared towards the upcoming release, we should opt for the dev-1.29 branch as the target branch for this PR instead of main.

/hold
(OK to unhold once the above comment is addressed)

[k8s-ci-robot]

New changes are detected. LGTM label has been removed.

[kiashok]

@kiashok Considering these changes are geared towards the upcoming release, we should opt for the dev-1.29 branch as the target branch for this PR instead of main.

/hold (OK to unhold once the above comment is addressed)

@dipesh-rawat Opened #44028 . Should this PR remain open so the changes get checked into the main branch anyway?

[katcosgrove]

Hi @kiashok! If you are now documenting this KEP in #44028 instead of here, please close this PR. All of the docs for v1.29 are merged on release day from our dev branch, so it is correct to point the docs PR at dev-1.29, not main.

[dipesh-rawat]

Closing this in favour of #44028 that has the same changes.

/close

[k8s-ci-robot]

@dipesh-rawat: Closed this PR.

In response to this:

Closing this in favour of #44028 that has the same changes.

/close

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.