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

[ENHANCEMENT] add kubebuilder annotations to runtime types #1745

Merged

Conversation

jgbernalp
Copy link
Contributor

Description

This PR adds kubebuilder annotations to interface types that are resolved at runtime, this allows that the CRD schema can store these dynamic fields

Checklist

  • Pull request has a descriptive title and context useful to a reviewer.
  • Pull request title follows the [<catalog_entry>] <commit message> naming convention using one of the
    following catalog_entry values: FEATURE, ENHANCEMENT, BUGFIX, BREAKINGCHANGE, DOC,IGNORE.
  • All commits have DCO signoffs.

UI Changes

no UI changes

Signed-off-by: Gabriel Bernal <gbernal@redhat.com>
@jgbernalp jgbernalp force-pushed the add-kubebuilder-annotations-for-runtime-types branch from dd11e4b to 1f021bf Compare February 6, 2024 10:03
Copy link
Member

@Nexucis Nexucis left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

👍

Wouldn't be better if we add the kubeBuilder annotation on every field (with the appropriate associated schema perhaps)?

@jgbernalp
Copy link
Contributor Author

👍

Wouldn't be better if we add the kubeBuilder annotation on every field (with the appropriate associated schema perhaps)?

other types are resolved to its defined type. But if I understand correctly, these dynamic fields are based on the available plugins. Which is unknown when generating the CDR schema.

@Nexucis Nexucis added this pull request to the merge queue Feb 6, 2024
@Nexucis
Copy link
Member

Nexucis commented Feb 6, 2024

But if I understand correctly, these dynamic fields are based on the available plugins. Which is unknown when generating the CDR schema.

yeah that depends on what is available in the Perses instance

Merged via the queue into perses:main with commit 577b4ab Feb 6, 2024
18 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

2 participants