Skip to content

Conversation

@jwforres
Copy link
Member

No description provided.

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. label May 19, 2020
@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label May 19, 2020
CONVENTIONS.md Outdated
## Motivation

The conventions are intended to help with consistency across the project. Users
of the platform expect this consistency in the experience and operation of the cluster.
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Developers of the platform expect this consistency in the code to quickly identify issues across codebases.

Maybe a comment too about how consistency simplifies explanation, reduces accidental complexity.

@jwforres
Copy link
Member Author

cc @derekwaynecarr @markmc @crawford @eparis @russellb since your names are on it as authors / approvers / reviewers

@jwforres jwforres changed the title [WIP] Bootstrap an OpenShift conventions document for the project Bootstrap an OpenShift conventions document for the project May 21, 2020
@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot removed the do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. label May 21, 2020
@derekwaynecarr
Copy link
Member

derekwaynecarr commented May 21, 2020

we can add this as a follow-on PR, but I want to capture outcomes for some discussions.

When should an operand tolerate all taints?

  1. if the operand is required to form a functional Kubernetes node
  2. if the operand is required to support workloads sourced from an internal or external registry that core components depend upon

An operand that tolerates all taints must implicitly tolerate in their component:

  1. a node that is not configured by an external cloud provider
  2. a node whose network is not configured

/cc @Miciah - i think this covers what we discussed.

@jwforres
Copy link
Member Author

@derekwaynecarr yeah lets do that in a follow-on, it will need a new section

@smarterclayton
Copy link
Contributor

/lgtm

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label May 21, 2020
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: jwforres, 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 [jwforres,smarterclayton]

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

@openshift-merge-robot openshift-merge-robot merged commit 4c08863 into openshift:master May 21, 2020
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.

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants