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

docs: use workload terminology for spec API #1165

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Jun 9, 2022

Conversation

sadlerap
Copy link
Contributor

@sadlerap sadlerap commented Jun 8, 2022

The specification hasn't used the noun "application" to refer to workloads for a little while, but our documentation still had a few references to that terminology. This changes them to use "workload" instead.

Signed-off-by: Andy Sadler ansadler@redhat.com

Changes

/kind docs

Submitter Checklist

As the author of this PR, please check off the items in this checklist:

  • Docs
    included if any changes are user facing
  • Tests
    included if any functionality added or changed. For bugfixes please include tests that can catch regressions
  • All acceptance test scenarios included in the PR which verifies a bugfix or a requested feature reported by a non-member are tagged with @external-feedback tag.
  • Follows the commit message standard

@sadlerap sadlerap added this to the 1.1.0 milestone Jun 8, 2022
@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Jun 8, 2022

@sadlerap: The label(s) kind/docs cannot be applied, because the repository doesn't have them.

In response to this:

The specification hasn't used the noun "application" to refer to workloads for a little while, but our documentation still had a few references to that terminology. This changes them to use "workload" instead.

Signed-off-by: Andy Sadler ansadler@redhat.com

Changes

/kind docs

Submitter Checklist

As the author of this PR, please check off the items in this checklist:

  • Docs
    included if any changes are user facing
  • Tests
    included if any functionality added or changed. For bugfixes please include tests that can catch regressions
  • All acceptance test scenarios included in the PR which verifies a bugfix or a requested feature reported by a non-member are tagged with @external-feedback tag.
  • Follows the commit message standard

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.

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot requested review from pmacik and shruthihub June 8, 2022 20:39
@github-actions github-actions bot added the acceptance-tests-skipped Marks PR that does not need to run the acceptance tests label Jun 8, 2022
@sadlerap
Copy link
Contributor Author

sadlerap commented Jun 8, 2022

/kind documentation

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the kind/documentation Improvements or additions to documentation label Jun 8, 2022
@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jun 8, 2022

Codecov Report

Merging #1165 (bc4e4fe) into master (6c77cd8) will not change coverage.
The diff coverage is n/a.

Impacted file tree graph

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master    #1165   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   58.71%   58.71%           
=======================================
  Files          33       33           
  Lines        2781     2781           
=======================================
  Hits         1633     1633           
  Misses        987      987           
  Partials      161      161           

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 6c77cd8...bc4e4fe. Read the comment docs.

The specification hasn't used the noun "application" to refer to
workloads for a little while, but our documentation still had a few
references to that terminology.  This changes them to use "workload"
instead.

Signed-off-by: Andy Sadler <ansadler@redhat.com>
@baijum
Copy link
Member

baijum commented Jun 9, 2022

/lgtm
/approve

@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Jun 9, 2022

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: baijum

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

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
acceptance-tests-skipped Marks PR that does not need to run the acceptance tests approved kind/documentation Improvements or additions to documentation lgtm
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants