Skip to content

Conversation

@tomassedovic
Copy link
Contributor

This lets the cluster-api-provider-* services read the Infrastructures
object under the config.openshift.io API group.

cluster-api-provider-openstack uses it to get the VIP addresses it needs
to configure on the OpenStack ports it creates.

This lets the cluster-api-provider-* services read the Infrastructures
object under the `config.openshift.io` API group.

cluster-api-provider-openstack uses it to get the VIP addresses it needs
to configure on the OpenStack ports it creates.
@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the size/XS Denotes a PR that changes 0-9 lines, ignoring generated files. label Jul 26, 2019
@tomassedovic
Copy link
Contributor Author

I'm not sure whether this is the right way of doing this. We've got some values in Infrastructure.PlatformStatus.OpenStack that we need to pass to cluster-api-provider-openstack because the cloud resources (the OpenStack Port specifically) needs them:

openshift/cluster-api-provider-openstack#52

There are other ways we could achieve this, but this is the simplest and cleanest from our point of view. However it does mean that CAPO needs to be able to read this object.

@celebdor
Copy link

I'm not sure whether this is the right way of doing this. We've got some values in Infrastructure.PlatformStatus.OpenStack that we need to pass to cluster-api-provider-openstack because the cloud resources (the OpenStack Port specifically) needs them:

openshift/cluster-api-provider-openstack#52

There are other ways we could achieve this, but this is the simplest and cleanest from our point of view. However it does mean that CAPO needs to be able to read this object.

I think it is perfectly legitimate for a machine controller to modify its behavior in accordance to the reported PlatformStatus that it is enabling.

@ingvagabund
Copy link
Member

MAO is still owner of RBAC rules for all actuators. I don't think there is a better place for this. In the future we might break the RBAC rules per an actuator (for cost of adding some duplicity).

/approve

@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: ingvagabund

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:

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

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Jul 29, 2019
@frobware
Copy link
Contributor

/lgtm

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

Thanks!

@openshift-merge-robot openshift-merge-robot merged commit 2a49705 into openshift:master Jul 29, 2019
@tomassedovic tomassedovic deleted the allow-infrastructure-from-cluster-api-provider branch July 29, 2019 14:44
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/XS Denotes a PR that changes 0-9 lines, ignoring generated files.

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants