minikube service could handle multiple-ports-per-service better

[mathuin]

The exact command to reproduce the issue:

1. Create a service with two ports in the spec, perhaps for Minecraft.
2. Run minikube service nothing-minecraft.

The full output of the command that failed:

Strictly speaking, the command does not fail. It's just not very helpful.

|-----------|-------------------|--------------------------------|
| NAMESPACE |       NAME        |              URL               |
|-----------|-------------------|--------------------------------|
| default   | nothing-minecraft | http://192.168.99.100:32225    |
|           |                   | http://192.168.99.100:32412    |
|-----------|-------------------|--------------------------------|

This could be improved by adding a column for the service port name:

|-----------|-------------------|--------|--------------------------------|
| NAMESPACE |       NAME        |  PORT  |              URL               |
|-----------|-------------------|--------|--------------------------------|
| default   | nothing-minecraft | server | http://192.168.99.100:32225    |
|           |                   | dynmap | http://192.168.99.100:32412    |
|-----------|-------------------|--------|--------------------------------|

I'm not sure if this column should always be there or only when there is more than one service. I have no preference, myself.

It would also be nice to specify the port on the command line for those wishing to open a URL in their default browser -- wouldn't do much good to open the Minecraft server port, for instance, but browsing the dynmap service would be helpful.

The output of the minikube logs command:

Not relevant

The operating system version:
Not relevant

[medyagh]

I was thinking maybe we could have an option to forward all the ports of the service in the cluster
maybe minikube service --all ?

https://github.com/txn2/kubefwd

@tstromberg ?

[tstromberg]

Sounds reasonable to me.

[11janci]

Hi, I'd like to work on this

[11janci]

Pls see the above PR, I currently show the new column always as I personally think it is not worth it adding a flag just for this and don't see any harm having it. Pls let me know if you'd like to change that behaviour (might be worth hiding it when empty)