Propose: add the KubeVela project as a integration

[barnettZQG]

What type of PR is this?

/kind documentation

What this PR does / why we need it:

The KubeVela community focuses on the practice of application specification, and we agree with the Gateway API in terms of the application gateway rules, so we integrate the specification.

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?:

NONE

[linux-foundation-easycla[bot]]

The committers listed above are authorized under a signed CLA.

• :white_check_mark: login: barnettZQG / name: barnettZQG (9d237169ed2042fb0d06c977d2341bd8eefafe75)

[k8s-ci-robot]

Welcome @barnettZQG!

It looks like this is your first PR to kubernetes-sigs/gateway-api 🎉. Please refer to our pull request process documentation to help your PR have a smooth ride to approval.

You will be prompted by a bot to use commands during the review process. Do not be afraid to follow the prompts! It is okay to experiment. Here is the bot commands documentation.

You can also check if kubernetes-sigs/gateway-api has its own contribution guidelines.

You may want to refer to our testing guide if you run into trouble with your tests not passing.

If you are having difficulty getting your pull request seen, please follow the recommended escalation practices. Also, for tips and tricks in the contribution process you may want to read the Kubernetes contributor cheat sheet. We want to make sure your contribution gets all the attention it needs!

Thank you, and welcome to Kubernetes. :smiley:

[k8s-ci-robot]

Hi @barnettZQG. Thanks for your PR.

I'm waiting for a kubernetes-sigs member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with /ok-to-test on its own line. Until that is done, I will not automatically test new commits in this PR, but the usual testing commands by org members will still work. Regular contributors should join the org to skip this step.

Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the ok-to-test label.

I understand the commands that are listed here.

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.

[robscott]

Hey @barnettZQG, thanks for the PR! Trying to understand how this integration works, could it be used with any Gateway API implementation or is it really just tied to Traefik? So far the integrations we have listed can be used with any implementation of the API.

[barnettZQG]

@robscott thanks for your reply, we provide the user's APIs (the trait in OAM, including http-route, https-route, tcp-route, udp-route) based on Gateway API. The traefik is only a provider, we will integrate other providers that support the Gateway API. For users, they only change the provider name, and no need to change other configurations, when they move the application to other environments.

[robscott]

Hey @barnettZQG, I brought this up in today's community meeting, some notes:

1. We haven't clearly defined what qualifies something to be listed as an integration yet
2. We want to limit it to integrations that support multiple implementations of the API

I'm going to work on a PR to resolve the first item. It sounds like you're going to add support for additional Gateway API implementations soon, maybe we can just leave this PR open until KubeVela is able to support more than Traefik?

[barnettZQG]

@robscott OK, we will do it.

[k8s-ci-robot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: barnettZQG Once this PR has been reviewed and has the lgtm label, please assign robscott for approval by writing /assign @robscott 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:

• OWNERS

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

[barnettZQG]

@robscott Hi, I am sorry to update it after a long time. Currently, we make an addon based on the Gateway API and provide two implementation addons. Traefik and Istio Gateway. Based on the same user-side experience, we could integrate more implementations.

[k8s-ci-robot]

@barnettZQG: PR needs rebase.

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-triage-robot]

The Kubernetes project currently lacks enough contributors to adequately respond to all issues and PRs.

This bot triages issues and PRs according to the following rules:

• After 90d of inactivity, lifecycle/stale is applied
• After 30d of inactivity since lifecycle/stale was applied, lifecycle/rotten is applied
• After 30d of inactivity since lifecycle/rotten was applied, the issue is closed

You can:

• Mark this issue or PR as fresh with /remove-lifecycle stale
• Mark this issue or PR as rotten with /lifecycle rotten
• Close this issue or PR with /close
• Offer to help out with Issue Triage

Please send feedback to sig-contributor-experience at kubernetes/community.

/lifecycle stale

[Xunzhuo]

/lgtm

Need to resolve some conflicts and a rebase.

[k8s-ci-robot]

@barnettZQG: The following tests failed, say /retest to rerun all failed tests or /retest-required to rerun all mandatory failed tests:

Test name	Commit	Details	Required	Rerun command
pull-gateway-api-verify	071f9a501906fa24d87364a1b4ab75daa8c54daf	link	true	/test pull-gateway-api-verify
pull-gateway-api-test	071f9a501906fa24d87364a1b4ab75daa8c54daf	link	true	/test pull-gateway-api-test

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard. Please help us cut down on flakes by linking to an open issue when you hit one in your PR.

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. I understand the commands that are listed here.

[Xunzhuo]

/hold after https://github.com/kubevela/catalog/issues/598 gets finished.

[shaneutt]

/hold after kubevela/catalog#598 gets finished.

I see we're waiting on https://github.com/kubevela/catalog/issues/598 before this PR can move forward. Looking at that issue it appears there is a significant amount of work that needs to be completed. Any thoughts on maybe closing this PR for the moment, so it doesn't have to linger, and then opening a PR when this is ready?

[barnettZQG]

@shaneutt OK. I will open a new PR after https://github.com/kubevela/catalog/issues/598 is complete.