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

Add upstream deployment #104

Conversation

kevinrizza
Copy link
Member

No description provided.

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files. labels Feb 6, 2019
@@ -0,0 +1,54 @@
apiVersion: apiextensions.k8s.io/v1beta1
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Nit: Since the user on vanilla k8s will also install OLM, should we follow the same directory layout? Right now, OLM has this layout deploy/upstream/manifests/{version}?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think we can follow our own layout as long as we document it.

For upstream, what we should we be doing is creating a CatalogSource with Marketplace in it. Add it to the OLM repo along with a Subscription so that we get installed automatically along with OLM. That way it is a one shot process. I am not saying this needs to be done now but can be done post 4.0.

serviceAccountName: marketplace-operator
containers:
- name: marketplace-operator
image: quay.io/openshift/origin-operator-marketplace:latest
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

If you are saying that the upstream version is 0.1.0 then this would need to be tagged. So we should either remove the version from the directory layout or figure out a way to tag the image.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

If we don't care specifically about versioning, lets just remove it.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I am fine with that for now. But I am guessing we would have to introduce versioning at some point for upstream.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Let's cross that bridge when we get there.

-Add upstream deployment manifests
-Update readme with new instructions
-Remove references to installation through OLM
@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot removed the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Feb 7, 2019
@kevinrizza kevinrizza changed the title Version upstream deployment Add upstream deployment Feb 7, 2019
@kevinrizza
Copy link
Member Author

@aravindhp @tkashem Removed versioning, please take a look again. Thanks

@tkashem
Copy link
Collaborator

tkashem commented Feb 7, 2019

/lgtm

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Feb 7, 2019
Copy link
Member

@aravindhp aravindhp left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

/approve

@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: aravindhp, kevinrizza

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

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Feb 7, 2019
@kevinrizza
Copy link
Member Author

/test e2e-aws

1 similar comment
@kevinrizza
Copy link
Member Author

/test e2e-aws

@openshift-merge-robot openshift-merge-robot merged commit 8a2761f into operator-framework:master Feb 8, 2019
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. lgtm 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

5 participants