Skip to content

Updating storage-classes to fix outdated redirect URL for volume-provisioning.md in external provisioner specification #56260

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Open
hclchinmaya wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Updating storage-classes to fix outdated redirect URL for volume-provisioning.md in external provisioner specification #56260

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
2 changes: 1 addition & 1 deletion content/en/docs/concepts/storage/storage-classes.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -110,7 +110,7 @@ for provisioning PVs. This field must be specified.
You are not restricted to specifying the "internal" provisioners
listed here (whose names are prefixed with "kubernetes.io" and shipped
alongside Kubernetes). You can also run and specify external provisioners,
which are independent programs that follow a [specification](https://git.k8s.io/design-proposals-archive/storage/volume-provisioning.md)
which are independent programs that follow a [specification](https://github.com/kubernetes/design-proposals-archive/blob/main/storage/volume-provisioning.md)

@lmktfy lmktfy Jun 28, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Even better:

Suggested change
which are independent programs that follow a [specification](https://github.com/kubernetes/design-proposals-archive/blob/main/storage/volume-provisioning.md)
which are independent programs that follow a specification

If doing this removal, which I recommend (we avoid linking to archived design proposals), then we should also file an issue about documenting the specification properly.

My guess: the current advice is "use CSI". If that's true, we can update the StorageClass concept to say so.

@bismayam bismayam Jun 29, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Hi @lmktfy
Are you suggesting this CSI-related updates to be included in this PR or tracked in a follow-up issue after removal of the archived proposal link ?

defined by Kubernetes. Authors of external provisioners have full discretion
over where their code lives, how the provisioner is shipped, how it needs to be
run, what volume plugin it uses (including Flex), etc. The repository
Expand Down