-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
ClusterAutoscaler: Put APIs in a separate go module #6315
ClusterAutoscaler: Put APIs in a separate go module #6315
Conversation
/assign @x13n |
Also, it might be worth it to create a separate go module in https://github.com/kubernetes/autoscaler/tree/master/cluster-autoscaler/provisioningrequest/client as well. @x13n WDYT? |
I don't think it's worth maintaining 3 packages. Maybe the client and APIs can be in the same package? |
@@ -0,0 +1,47 @@ | |||
module sigs.k8s.io/autoscaler/cluster-autoscaler/provisioningrequest/apis |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think the module should be
sigs.k8s.io/autoscaler/cluster-autoscaler/apis
where one of the folders is provisioningrequest
.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The reason being that we might have an generic (independent of the cloud provider) implementation of provisioningrequest
and it might have dependencies that are not worth leaking to users of the API.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I see. Maybe, we can put a client folder on sigs.k8s.io/autoscaler/cluster-autoscaler/apis/provisioningrequest/client
as well.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Doesn't sigs.k8s.io
resolve to kubernetes-sigs org? This repo is in main kubernetes org, so shouldn't it be under k8s.io/autoscaler/cluster-autoscaler
?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Oops. Sorry, you're right.
It makes sense. |
c5bc7d1
to
06b69a9
Compare
06b69a9
to
a4134e0
Compare
9586a26
to
3dc86e8
Compare
ad38998
to
f4aa3ef
Compare
129715a
to
759709f
Compare
I have rebased this PR to resolve conflicts. |
Hi @mwielgus! Could you take a look this PR since we need to get approve from you due to changing of hack/for-go-proj.sh. |
Signed-off-by: Yuki Iwai <[email protected]>
…es in the apis pkg Signed-off-by: Yuki Iwai <[email protected]>
4c15854
to
108385e
Compare
Signed-off-by: Yuki Iwai <[email protected]>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@x13n As you proposed in another thread, I cleaned up this script.
We can verify this script with ./hack/update-deps.sh ${K/K_ALPHA_VERSION} ${STABLE_APIS_VERSION}
like ./hack/update-deps.sh v1.30.0-alpha.3 v1.29.2
.
Signed-off-by: Yuki Iwai <[email protected]>
9c84824
to
798d611
Compare
Thanks! LGTM from my perspective. /lgtm |
/hold cancel |
@mwielgus @MaciekPytel @gjtempleton Could you get a chance to review this PR? |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
/lgtm
/approve
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: mwielgus, tenzen-y, x13n The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. The pull request process is described here
Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
What type of PR is this?
/kind cleanup
What this PR does / why we need it:
I put APIs in a separate go module.
Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
Fixes #6307
Special notes for your reviewer:
Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?
Additional documentation e.g., KEPs (Kubernetes Enhancement Proposals), usage docs, etc.: