Edits to self_provisioning file

[bfallonf]

@deads2k , this is some initial edits to PR #359 .

A few questions though:

1. There's talk about the projectRequestTemplate parameter in the master config file, but the example file in admin_guide/master_node_configuration doesn't have that parameter anywhere. Does this mean that this is optional? And that the reader has to manually put in the parameter? Or maybe the example file in master_node_configuration is out of date?
2. In dev_guide/projects there an example of how a developer can create a project. What's the difference between the procedure from that file, and one we're talking about here? Does the step I've talked about in my first question above need to happen before developers can create a project? I also feel like the example command in the projects file is wrong, as it's using osadm...
3. I'm unsure of what happens when the designated template does not exist. The API server creates a default template from what exactly? As in, does the API grab the "default template" from somewhere? Perhaps an already established template from somewhere in the OpenShift instance? If not, how does it know what the template should look like?

Thanks in advance!

[adellape]

Re: 1), the live example in master_node_configuration is indeed out of date. Part of my PR #360 (which also needs tech review, @deads2k, if you're keen) includes updating the example files, so it'll show the project* parameters, i.e.:

https://github.com/adellape/openshift-docs/blame/master_node_config_edits/admin_guide/master_node_configuration.adoc#L194

Re: 2), my other PR #331 also happens to update dev_guide/projects to update that lone osadm usage while I was in there, but you could take care of it here, since IDK if that [proposal] PR is gonna fly yet.

Re: 3) my understanding from trying it out the other day was that it uses an already established template that behaves in the manner described in the original PR. You can view the default template after the master has started up using: $ osc edit template/project-request -n openshift.

[bfallonf]

@adellape Thanks! I'll leave the first part to you and your PR. As for question 2, I just updated the command. The rest of your changes in that file (section headings, rewording, etc) can probably go through when/if that PR goes ahead. If not, the rest can go in during another edit.

As for the last questions, and after our chat today, I'm not sure if too much is needed, but I went about some minor rewording and threw in your command about checking the default template.

@deads2k Please let us know what you think of the changes and if there's anything else need for this doc.

[deads2k]

I have good news and bad news. The good news is that the doc looks good for today's code. The bad news is that there will be some changes (hopefully today) around exactly what the defaulting mechanism looks like.

I'll come back and add comments once it's been reworked.

[deads2k]

openshift/origin#2267 changes behavior in the following ways:

1. an empty projectRequestTemplate now makes use of a hardcoded template that is not written out anywhere.
2. the default is now an empty string for projectRequestTemplate

The template substitution variables are still correct and making a custom template still works the same way.

[adellape]

@deads2k If it's no longer written out anywhere, would it be useful to document what an example project template could look like, as a starting point in case someone wants to create a custom one? For example, from looking at the default template yesterday: https://gist.github.com/adellape/2979d03460c928af91d7

[deads2k]

would it be useful to document what an example project template could look like, as a starting point in case someone wants to create a custom one?

Very useful. That template looks fine.

[deads2k]

just remember to strip the auto-completed stuff.

[bfallonf]

@deads2k @adellape Thanks for the extra info for this. I've made the changes outlined above, and put in the example template. Although I've taken out the creationTimestamp, and uid fields as they're the ones I think meant by "the auto-completed stuff".

Question: What's the difference between the default template Alex gave above, and the example template given in the templates section of the docs:

http://docs.openshift.com/enterprise/latest/dev_guide/templates.html#

Seems like it would be a good idea to just link to the templates file... Either way, if what we have here is appropriate, this might be near completion.

Thanks, guys!

[adellape]

@bfallonf A template in general can describe all sorts of resources. The example template being shown for this topic is more specifically describing a particular set of resources that can be used by a platform admin to customize the default "new project request" scenario.

[deads2k]

remove line and remove:

1. creationTimestamp
2. resoruceVersion
3. selfLink
4. uid

[bfallonf]

@adellape Cool. I think I get you. I don't think that changes anything in the docs.

@deads2k I've taken out the suggested lines, and also put the en vars into footnotes in the template example instead of in a table. If there's nothing else, I'll put this up for peer review. Thanks!

[bfallonf]

Further edit: @adellape I also put in the changes to the default template information, as discussed on IRC.

[deads2k]

We create the default template internally, but we never persist it, so you can't view it.

[adellape]

@bfallonf Sorry, my merge of #331 makes this need a rebase (the aforementioned osadm new-project fix in dev_guide/projects).

[bfallonf]

@deads2k @adellape Sure. Edits made as per suggestions. Let me know if there's anything else for this PR, otherwise, should be ok to merge.

[adellape]

What about "Templates for New Projects"? Avoids starting off the title with "The".

[bfallonf]

@adellape Good suggestion.

[adellape]

Maybe embed link to ../architecture/additional_concepts/authorization.html#roles on "role binding" for context.

[bfallonf]

@adellape Done. Thanks for the suggestions. I went through the entire projects.adoc file too and made sure the formatting was right. If there's nothing else, this should be ok to merge.

[adellape]

Thanks, merging.