cluster-api-provider-packet icon indicating copy to clipboard operation
cluster-api-provider-packet copied to clipboard

✨ Add support for metros

Open moadqassem opened this issue 3 years ago • 2 comments
trafficstars

What this PR does / why we need it: Adding metro support to packet cluster api crds

Which issue(s) this PR fixes Fixes https://github.com/kubernetes-sigs/cluster-api-provider-packet/issues/313

moadqassem avatar Oct 04 '22 13:10 moadqassem

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: moadqassem Once this PR has been reviewed and has the lgtm label, please assign detiber for approval by writing /assign @detiber in a comment. For more information see:The Kubernetes Code Review Process.

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found 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

k8s-ci-robot avatar Oct 04 '22 13:10 k8s-ci-robot

At first glance, this looks good, @moadqassem. We'll want to make sure that Facility is also Optional and check that one of the two fields has been provided (the fields are mutually exclusive in API Device create requests).

We should also use Metro-based deployment in one of the E2E tests.

displague avatar Oct 04 '22 16:10 displague

@moadqassem https://github.com/moadqassem/cluster-api-provider-packet/pull/1. This is a WIP. I think there are a few more changes to make to ensure that Facility and Metro are mutually exclusive spec arguments with one of the two always required.

displague avatar Mar 18 '23 11:03 displague

@moadqassem https://github.com/moadqassem/cluster-api-provider-packet/pull/1. This is a WIP. I think there are a few more changes to make to ensure that Facility and Metro are mutually exclusive spec arguments with one of the two always required.

Damn! Completely forgot about this. Let me convert it to WIP and will take care of it tomorrow 😉

moadqassem avatar Mar 18 '23 11:03 moadqassem

Please refer back to #313 for some of the other todos we need to do here. Sounds like have a plan for the first one, and the last one just involves dropping the v1alpha3 stuff, but the others still need decisions.

cprivitere avatar Mar 20 '23 19:03 cprivitere

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: moadqassem Once this PR has been reviewed and has the lgtm label, please assign detiber for approval. For more information see the Kubernetes Code Review Process.

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found 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

k8s-ci-robot avatar Mar 20 '23 19:03 k8s-ci-robot

Sounds like @moadqassem doesn't have time to work on this fork anymore, so we're going to take it over.

cprivitere avatar Mar 24 '23 17:03 cprivitere

Closing in favor of #538

cprivitere avatar Mar 24 '23 17:03 cprivitere

/close

cprivitere avatar Mar 24 '23 17:03 cprivitere

@cprivitere: Closed this PR.

In response to this:

/close

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.

k8s-ci-robot avatar Mar 24 '23 17:03 k8s-ci-robot