Damien Grisonnet

Looking forward to start using this feature, thank you @bavarianbidi :) /lgtm /approve /unhold

I stumbled upon this issue after looking at https://github.com/kubernetes-sigs/custom-metrics-apiserver/issues/70 again. As far as I can tell, this shouldn't be preventing this particular effort since you can actually deploy multiple instance...

Ack, just wanted to make sure. We should definitely look into having the router implemented for that purpose. Out of curiosity, do you know if the various adapters are planning...

> With regards to existing adapters, Prometheus is another that is already a scaler. But I think this is not related in the sense that we should be open to...

There is no urgency at all, I am just trying to find a group of people that would be interested in that effort. Since we have already a couple of...

The stability guarantees that we have for Kubernetes only apply to k/k since the static analysis tools that make sure metrics don't change are only run there. You could reuse...

There are a few false positives in the shared in https://github.com/kubernetes-sigs/metrics-server/issues/1096#issuecomment-1320205547. For instance, we get [CVE-2022-1996](https://github.com/advisories/GHSA-r48q-9g5r-8q2h) via a transitive dependency from the apiserver, and looking at this comment: https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/pull/110518#issuecomment-1158948956, they...

As I mentioned before those are false positives, we are using none of the features that are vulnerable in these CVEs.

Closing the issue since CVEs impacting v0.6.1 have been fixed in a new v0.6.2 release.

Could you please create a new github issue and omit the CVEs that I previously marked as false positives? Note that the false positives noted before will dissapear once we...