You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to commits@camel.apache.org by GitBox <gi...@apache.org> on 2021/03/04 16:30:09 UTC
[GitHub] [camel-k] astefanutti opened a new issue #2096: PodSpecable Integration
astefanutti opened a new issue #2096:
URL: https://github.com/apache/camel-k/issues/2096
In a growing number of use-cases, it is preferable, or expected, that the Integration resource be "PodSpecable".
The main use cases are:
* Knative SinkBinding: #1976
* Service Binding: #2077
It is also useful in the general case, to enables the configuration of the Integration pods: #1657.
----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
[GitHub] [camel-k] nicolaferraro commented on issue #2096: PodSpecable Integration
Posted by GitBox <gi...@apache.org>.
nicolaferraro commented on issue #2096:
URL: https://github.com/apache/camel-k/issues/2096#issuecomment-796599998
> @lburgazzoli that sounds logical. There is no need for creating a build whose resulting image is overwritten by the Integration PodSpec.
>
> That can lead to inconsistencies, e.g. with the Dependencies field. Though Pod-Specability is a mechanism that brings high-level of configurability, hence must be used responsibly.
>
> An idea, if we try to map the logic of merging rather than replacing, to container images, could be to use the provided image as the base image?
Yeah, sounds interesting, but I guess the image at the moment misses the relevant metadata (e.g. list of dependencies included) to let us perform merging. Although containers have labels as well...
----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
[GitHub] [camel-k] johnpoth commented on issue #2096: PodSpecable Integration
Posted by GitBox <gi...@apache.org>.
johnpoth commented on issue #2096:
URL: https://github.com/apache/camel-k/issues/2096#issuecomment-790804398
In the case of Service Binding, the specification has alleviated that [constraint](https://github.com/k8s-service-bindings/spec/commit/20daf4e312ca502a301cb552624680152d4fe319)
----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
[GitHub] [camel-k] astefanutti commented on issue #2096: PodSpecable Integration
Posted by GitBox <gi...@apache.org>.
astefanutti commented on issue #2096:
URL: https://github.com/apache/camel-k/issues/2096#issuecomment-790808223
> In the case of Service Binding, the specification has alleviated that [constraint](https://github.com/k8s-service-bindings/spec/commit/20daf4e312ca502a301cb552624680152d4fe319)
Would that simplify or not to have Integration PodSpec-able w.r.t. Service Binding?
----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
[GitHub] [camel-k] lburgazzoli commented on issue #2096: PodSpecable Integration
Posted by GitBox <gi...@apache.org>.
lburgazzoli commented on issue #2096:
URL: https://github.com/apache/camel-k/issues/2096#issuecomment-796589297
@astefanutti @nicolaferraro wonder if when making making an integration podspecable (but I think also other resources like the kamelet binding can benefit from it), then if I define an image with name "integration" (or whatever we decide to use to identify the integration container), that should be considered as an equivalent of a kit so in that case, no build should be performed
----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
[GitHub] [camel-k] astefanutti commented on issue #2096: PodSpecable Integration
Posted by GitBox <gi...@apache.org>.
astefanutti commented on issue #2096:
URL: https://github.com/apache/camel-k/issues/2096#issuecomment-796597994
@lburgazzoli that sounds logical. There is no need for creating a build whose resulting image is overwritten by the Integration PodSpec.
That can lead to inconsistencies, e.g. with the Dependencies field. Though Pod-Specability is a mechanism that brings high-level of configurability, hence must be used responsibly.
An idea, if we try to map the logic of merging rather than replacing, to container images, would be to use the provided image as the base image.
----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
[GitHub] [camel-k] mmelko commented on issue #2096: PodSpecable Integration
Posted by GitBox <gi...@apache.org>.
mmelko commented on issue #2096:
URL: https://github.com/apache/camel-k/issues/2096#issuecomment-800179117
Currently I've created a pod trait that will merge the `PodTemplateSpec` from the integration into deployment's one. I guess those validation should be done also from the pod trait right? Do we know any other things that shouldn't be replaced/modified ?
----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
[GitHub] [camel-k] astefanutti closed issue #2096: PodSpecable Integration
Posted by GitBox <gi...@apache.org>.
astefanutti closed issue #2096:
URL: https://github.com/apache/camel-k/issues/2096
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
[GitHub] [camel-k] astefanutti edited a comment on issue #2096: PodSpecable Integration
Posted by GitBox <gi...@apache.org>.
astefanutti edited a comment on issue #2096:
URL: https://github.com/apache/camel-k/issues/2096#issuecomment-796597994
@lburgazzoli that sounds logical. There is no need for creating a build whose resulting image is overwritten by the Integration PodSpec.
That can lead to inconsistencies, e.g. with the Dependencies field. Though Pod-Specability is a mechanism that brings high-level of configurability, hence must be used responsibly.
An idea, if we try to map the logic of merging rather than replacing, to container images, could be to use the provided image as the base image?
----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
[GitHub] [camel-k] mmelko commented on issue #2096: PodSpecable Integration
Posted by GitBox <gi...@apache.org>.
mmelko commented on issue #2096:
URL: https://github.com/apache/camel-k/issues/2096#issuecomment-801914829
wip PR: https://github.com/apache/camel-k/pull/1861 so far without any validations
----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
[GitHub] [camel-k] mmelko commented on issue #2096: PodSpecable Integration
Posted by GitBox <gi...@apache.org>.
mmelko commented on issue #2096:
URL: https://github.com/apache/camel-k/issues/2096#issuecomment-791481662
I can look at this.
----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
[GitHub] [camel-k] astefanutti commented on issue #2096: PodSpecable Integration
Posted by GitBox <gi...@apache.org>.
astefanutti commented on issue #2096:
URL: https://github.com/apache/camel-k/issues/2096#issuecomment-796603074
> Yeah, sounds interesting, but I guess the image at the moment misses the relevant metadata (e.g. list of dependencies included) to let us perform merging. Although containers have labels as well...
Right, probably better to keep it simple!
----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
[GitHub] [camel-k] lburgazzoli commented on issue #2096: PodSpecable Integration
Posted by GitBox <gi...@apache.org>.
lburgazzoli commented on issue #2096:
URL: https://github.com/apache/camel-k/issues/2096#issuecomment-796609221
>
> That can lead to inconsistencies, e.g. with the Dependencies field. Though Pod-Specability is a mechanism that brings high-level of configurability, hence must be used responsibly.
>
We can add validations so i.e. if you put a container image and dependencies, then we fail
----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org