Skip to content

Conversation

@smarterclayton
Copy link
Contributor

Expand the list of constants, clarify that unsupported platforms
must be handled as None, and improve godoc. These are not supported
platforms, these are the constants that will be returned.

Expand the list of constants, clarify that unsupported platforms
must be handled as None, and improve godoc. These are not supported
platforms, these are the constants that will be returned.
@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files. label Jan 23, 2019
@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Jan 23, 2019
@smarterclayton
Copy link
Contributor Author

As part of openshift/installer#1112 clarify the set of constants and document the "unrecognized behavior must be None". This ensures we don't use inconsistent constants (installer and mco don't match these values yet, but will need to before API freeze)

@abhinavdahiya @crawford @bparees @ironcladlou @ashcrow as folks who have components that will need to ensure toleration exists.

// "OpenStack", "VSphere", and "None". Individual components may not support
// all platforms, and must handle unrecognized platforms as None if they do
// not support that platform.
Platform PlatformType `json:"platform,omitempty"`
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

// other integrations are enabled. If None, no infrastructure automation is
// enabled.
// enabled. Allowed values are "AWS", "Azure", "GCP", "Libvirt",
// "OpenStack", "VSphere", and "None". Individual components may not support
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think we need advice for components to indicate their lack of support.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We do, but that'll be in #1112. I don't want our public api docs to be instructions to our teams (beyond general statements), especially since we don't know the instructions quite yet.

@smarterclayton
Copy link
Contributor Author

Any other comments?

@deads2k
Copy link
Contributor

deads2k commented Jan 29, 2019

Assuming we get our directions for how to indicate that we didn't fulfill intent

/lgtm

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Jan 29, 2019
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: deads2k, smarterclayton

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Details Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:
  • OWNERS [deads2k,smarterclayton]

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

@derekwaynecarr
Copy link
Member

this looks generally fine to me as well. agree w/ david's comment.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files.

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants