Include namespace in determining new-app dup objects

[csrwng]

Fixes #3947

[csrwng]

@jhadvig @bparees ptal

[smarterclayton]

What if I'm creating an app from an image stream in the current namespace where the output name is the same as the input name? oc new-build --image-stream=foo --name foo?

[csrwng]

you'll create a build loop

[csrwng]

should we stop you from shooting yourself in the foot?

[smarterclayton]

In this case, i don't know what the user expects, but they probably expect something. I only bring it up because there is an existing item and a dup in the same namespace, but the new object probably doesn't have namespace set while the old one does. So the acceptor won't think they're duplicates.

[csrwng]

ic, hmm, we wouldn't catch it... so you'd get an error saying it couldn't be saved because it's a dup, which I guess is ok?

[smarterclayton]

maybe?

[bparees]

why doesn't the new object have namespace set?

lgtm but not merging pending the outcome of this discussion.

[smarterclayton]

Mostly so you can -o yaml it and use it on another namespace.

On Aug 20, 2015, at 6:33 PM, Ben Parees notifications@github.com wrote:

why doesn't the new object have namespace set?

lgtm but not merging pending the outcome of this discussion.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#4297 (comment).

[bparees]

hm. would it make more sense to strip the namespace out when outputting yaml, instead of not setting one?

[csrwng]

Hmm, not sure that I see much benefit to it. IMHO that you get an error
saying you couldn't create the image stream because there's one with the
same name is ok.

On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 9:35 PM, Ben Parees notifications@github.com
wrote:

hm. would it make more sense to strip the namespace out when outputting
yaml, instead of not setting one?

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#4297 (comment).

[bparees]

works for me. [merge]

[csrwng]

I think we need to get new-app handle existing resources more intelligently like warning you about duplicates and giving you options to overwrite/ignore/merge, but we should create a card for it :-)

[openshift-bot]

Evaluated for origin merge up to 40566ce

[openshift-bot]

[Test]ing while waiting on the merge queue

[openshift-bot]

Evaluated for origin test up to 40566ce

[smarterclayton]

Yeah, that's before we save but after we would output. But technically
that's just reconciliation, so hopefully upstream will sort that out soon.

On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 9:45 PM, Cesar Wong notifications@github.com
wrote:

I think we need to get new-app handle existing resources more
intelligently like warning you about duplicates and giving you options to
overwrite/ignore/merge, but we should create a card for it :-)

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#4297 (comment).

Clayton Coleman | Lead Engineer, OpenShift

[openshift-bot]

continuous-integration/openshift-jenkins/test SUCCESS (https://ci.openshift.redhat.com/jenkins/job/test_pull_requests_origin/4400/)

[openshift-bot]

continuous-integration/openshift-jenkins/merge SUCCESS (https://ci.openshift.redhat.com/jenkins/job/merge_pull_requests_origin/3061/) (Image: devenv-fedora_2191)