Dave Protasowski

I think what makes sense to me is when `ttlSecondsAfterFinished` is set to `0` then kapp should take over ownership of the object's lifecycle Thus - remove the `0` ttl...

We perform `Modify yaml given to kapp using ytt.` currently This option `Add Config to opt in kapp for this special behaviour.` would be nice

I just encountered this as while using an idempotent [K8s job](https://github.com/knative/serving/blob/main/config/post-install/storage-version-migration.yaml#L18) with `kapp` I can think of two potential approaches to solving this problem for K8s jobs 1) `kapp` generates...

Yeah I knew piping it to jq/yq is an option though I wanted the nice table output that `kapp` produces

Yeah that'd work for me

Knative has verbose comments in their configmaps under a `_example` key ie. https://github.com/knative/serving/blob/main/config/core/configmaps/autoscaler.yaml#L25

#### Background From [slack thread](https://kubernetes.slack.com/archives/CH8KCCKA5/p1649116160660209) Originally I was encountering the conflict because my deployment has an HPA adjusting it's `spec.replicas` ``` kapp: Error: Applying update deployment/activator (apps/v1) namespace: 24f0bc17-06dc-424b-a9db-8d4e744d7790: Failed...

Reasons for the conflict - k8s controller adds status conditions - I see something adds `deployment.kubernetes.io/revision` annotation I guess should adding the annotation `kapp.k14s.io/original` be a PATCH instead of an...

See: https://kubernetes.io/docs/tasks/manage-kubernetes-objects/update-api-object-kubectl-patch/ Essentially you can apply a patch to an existing object and you shouldn't receive the API conflicts.

> how are we enforcing the copy of the licensed code if there's any change in it? can't we use the `go.sum` file to ensure there aren't any local changes...