Skip to content

Conversation

@bfallonf
Copy link

@bfallonf bfallonf commented Jun 4, 2015

@soltysh This PR is in response to your PR: #339

I have some questions, though it might be easier to ask them in the file as they're about specific parts that would be hard to reference here...

Thanks!

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@soltysh If Kubernetes provides the secret, why are we creating one in the next step? Would it more accurate to say something like "Kubernetes has the ability to utilize secret..." then we go on to create the secret for Kubernetes to utilize?

Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yes, by provides I've meant about the ability to create ones.

@adellape
Copy link
Contributor

adellape commented Jun 4, 2015

@bfallonf A lot of similar changes going on in #431

@bfallonf
Copy link
Author

bfallonf commented Jun 4, 2015

@adellape True. Similar, but not exact. Once the other merges I'll get that info in here and go through this one again. I think most (all?) of my questions above still stand.

@adellape
Copy link
Contributor

adellape commented Jun 5, 2015

@bfallonf Yea, my comment here was just an FYI that this would probably conflict. Merged 431, so this needs a rebase.

@soltysh
Copy link

soltysh commented Jun 5, 2015

@bfallonf sorry, I was out yesterday, will review this today.

@soltysh
Copy link

soltysh commented Jun 5, 2015

@bfallonf you should be ok, be aware though we'll be moving this file contents into dev_guide/builds.adoc, heads up for #444.

@bfallonf bfallonf mentioned this pull request Jun 9, 2015
@bfallonf
Copy link
Author

bfallonf commented Jun 9, 2015

Seems #444 has created many more conflicts. I'll get to this once that's ironed out.

@adellape
Copy link
Contributor

@bfallonf Should be safe to rebase now.

@bfallonf
Copy link
Author

Might have to close this one. The builds file has been through too many changes to make this workable. The work from this PR is now in #496

@bfallonf bfallonf closed this Jun 15, 2015
@bfallonf bfallonf deleted the external_git branch June 15, 2015 03:27
@bfallonf bfallonf mentioned this pull request Jun 22, 2015
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants