feat: opm package pruning #15
Conversation
openshift-ci-robot
added
the
do-not-merge/work-in-progress
openshift-ci-robot
removed
the
do-not-merge/work-in-progress
|
This enhancement request is implemented in operator-framework/operator-registry#251 |
njhale
left a comment
njhale
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks for adding this!
I just had one primary question:
| #### New Commands | ||
|
|
||
| A `filter` subcommand will be added to both the `index` and `registry` command | ||
| mimmicking the behavior of `rm` in all but one significant way. The `operators` |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
if it's a new subcommand, could it not use packages in both instances? Alternatively, the package list could be the positional parameters of the command, rather than a named parameter; e.g. opm index filter <bundle-img> <pkg-0> <pkg-1> ... <pkg-n>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
My only struggle with this idea is wanting consistency. For example, when you remove operators from an index by saying opm index rm --from-index <index-img> --operators <op1>,<op2> and it seems fair for a user to think prune would look something like opm index prune --from-index <index-img> --operators <op1>,<op2>.
It may be that packages is really most appropriate for all of opm (index|registry) (rm|prune) but I'm hesitant to do that for all of opm (index|registry) prune without consensus. WDYT @ecordell ?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Also fits with this comment operator-framework/operator-registry#243 (comment)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I like being consistent, though IMO the existing commands are probably not following typical UX conventions; e.g no primary positional argument, required options, etc.
|
/lgtm |
enhancements/opm-package-pruning.md
Outdated
| A `prune` subcommand will be added to both the `index` and `registry` command | ||
| mimmicking the behavior of `rm` in all but one significant way. The `operators` | ||
| flag (for `index`es) and `packages` flag (for `registry`es) will represent the | ||
| packages to be kept in the index or registry. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
will these both be represented by a packages option? e.g. opm index prune --packages <pkgs> ... and opm registry prune --packages <pkgs> ...
Enhancement request to add `prune` subcommand to `opm`s `registry` and `index` commands.
5 participants
Enhancement request to add
prunesubcommand toopmsregistryandindexcommands.