Skip to content

Conversation

@LorbusChris
Copy link
Contributor

@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 Nov 3, 2020
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: LorbusChris
To complete the pull request process, please assign hardys after the PR has been reviewed.
You can assign the PR to them by writing /assign @hardys in a comment when ready.

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

Details Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

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

@LorbusChris
Copy link
Contributor Author

/cc @crawford @ashcrow @cgwalters @runcom

@LorbusChris
Copy link
Contributor Author

Note to myself:

  • Add explanation that only a subset of Ignition (and thus FCC) features is supported by MCO
  • Add mention of FCC variants (current implementation in PR *: Support CoreOS configs in MCs machine-config-operator#1980 does not use a variant parser, but the variant-agnostic base parser). Currently only a fcos variant exists, but a rhcos variant is planned.

@cgwalters
Copy link
Member

I think this is conditional on coreos/butane#79 - maintaining that split is probably the bulk of the effort here, including dealing with the set of things in FCOS but not RHCOS (switching streams, zincati, etc. - there may be more in the future but hopefully we keep it constrained)

@cgwalters
Copy link
Member

I've been thinking about this more. It feels like we should do a more clean break here and introduce a new coreosconfig CRD that is just this. The way MachineConfig is either Ignition or the "custom MC stuff" (or both) is confusing. Plus it has things users shouldn't set like osImageURL.

(Internally coreosconfigs would compile into machineconfig of course)

@openshift-bot
Copy link

Issues go stale after 90d of inactivity.

Mark the issue as fresh by commenting /remove-lifecycle stale.
Stale issues rot after an additional 30d of inactivity and eventually close.
Exclude this issue from closing by commenting /lifecycle frozen.

If this issue is safe to close now please do so with /close.

/lifecycle stale

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the lifecycle/stale Denotes an issue or PR has remained open with no activity and has become stale. label Mar 2, 2021
@openshift-bot
Copy link

Stale issues rot after 30d of inactivity.

Mark the issue as fresh by commenting /remove-lifecycle rotten.
Rotten issues close after an additional 30d of inactivity.
Exclude this issue from closing by commenting /lifecycle frozen.

If this issue is safe to close now please do so with /close.

/lifecycle rotten
/remove-lifecycle stale

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added lifecycle/rotten Denotes an issue or PR that has aged beyond stale and will be auto-closed. and removed lifecycle/stale Denotes an issue or PR has remained open with no activity and has become stale. labels Apr 1, 2021
@LorbusChris
Copy link
Contributor Author

I've been thinking about this more. It feels like we should do a more clean break here and introduce a new coreosconfig CRD that is just this. The way MachineConfig is either Ignition or the "custom MC stuff" (or both) is confusing. Plus it has things users shouldn't set like osImageURL.

(Internally coreosconfigs would compile into machineconfig of course)

I'm closing this proposal in favor of the approach described above
/close

@LorbusChris LorbusChris closed this Apr 6, 2021
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link

@LorbusChris: Closed this PR.

Details

In response to this:

I've been thinking about this more. It feels like we should do a more clean break here and introduce a new coreosconfig CRD that is just this. The way MachineConfig is either Ignition or the "custom MC stuff" (or both) is confusing. Plus it has things users shouldn't set like osImageURL.

(Internally coreosconfigs would compile into machineconfig of course)

I'm closing this proposal in favor of the approach described above
/close

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository.

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

Labels

do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. lifecycle/rotten Denotes an issue or PR that has aged beyond stale and will be auto-closed.

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants