kubebuilder
kubebuilder copied to clipboard
kubernetes-sigs
The book should document declarative defaulting
We should document declarative defaulting better in the book, since it's been supported for quite a few versions now. We'll need to warn about Kubernetes versions with a note like we do here: https://github.com/kubernetes-sigs/kubebuilder/blame/master/docs/book/src/multiversion-tutorial/tutorial.md#L26, but we should reccomend this over using mutating webhooks when possible.
/kind feature
/good-first-issue
(this entails moving the current "defaulting webhook" documentation to a standalone tutorial and editing the page where we go over types and validation markers to talk about defaulting markers too)
@DirectXMan12: This request has been marked as suitable for new contributors.
Please ensure the request meets the requirements listed here.
If this request no longer meets these requirements, the label can be removed
by commenting with the /remove-good-first-issue command.
In response to this:
/good-first-issue
(this entails moving the current "defaulting webhook" documentation to a standalone tutorial and editing the page where we go over types and validation markers to talk about defaulting markers too)
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.
Issues go stale after 90d of inactivity.
Mark the issue as fresh with /remove-lifecycle stale.
Stale issues rot after an additional 30d of inactivity and eventually close.
If this issue is safe to close now please do so with /close.
Send feedback to sig-testing, kubernetes/test-infra and/or fejta. /lifecycle stale
Stale issues rot after 30d of inactivity.
Mark the issue as fresh with /remove-lifecycle rotten.
Rotten issues close after an additional 30d of inactivity.
If this issue is safe to close now please do so with /close.
Send feedback to sig-contributor-experience at kubernetes/community. /lifecycle rotten
I see you are assigned @krol3, don't know if you are working on it or this is still relevant. But if it's still relevant and you are ok with this I would love to give this a try :)
@DirectXMan12 Since it's been a long time ago I think it's better that I propose what I think I have to do before starting so here it goes:
- The page about implementing defaulting/validating webhook has to be moved to reference. Since we want people to use default/validation markers in the tutorial
- Add a new page in the tutorial instead of the webhook page that uses a default marker and a validation marker. Only thing I am not sure of is the
validateScheduleFormatfunction this is impossible to write with validation markers I believe. So maybe for that we keep a validating webhook in the tutorial? Or we might just past a link to the reference defaulting/validating webhook page.
If my idea is ok please let me know and I'll get started on it :) Otherwise please feel free to give me some of your ideas.
Yes, it is not assigned to anybody. Please, feel free to get this one.
Hey @camilamacedo86 having gone through the previous comments I suppose, I need to move this document into a tutorial in this section as 2.3.2 or 2.3.1.1... where we take this into consideration :
but we should recommend this over using mutating webhooks when possible.
Then add a new page in this section namely 5.6.7 to talk about default markers as mentioned in
(this entails moving the current "defaulting webhook" documentation to a standalone tutorial and editing the page where we go over types and validation markers to talk about defaulting markers too)
Hi @parul5sahoo,
Hello, are you working on this one? If not could you please unsigned so that you let others try to check this one?
Hey @sayantani11 if you wish we can work on this issue together /assign
Hi @sayantani11 and @ashutosh887,
Are you working on this one? If not, could you please remove the /assign?