Promote experimental commands into oadm

[smarterclayton]

Forgot to do this :)

Bunch of experimental commands are stable now.

[smarterclayton]

Has docs impact, we have to leave the old alias for one release

[deads2k]

I see sync-groups and prune-groups. openshift ex validate master-config and openshift ex validate node-config would be good. Do we want to claim oadm validate * for them?

[deads2k]

@stevekuznetsov the groups ones are pretty clear. We already have oadm groups as a subcommand to drop them under.

[smarterclayton]

Other discussion point - moving everything in oadm into "oc cluster *"

On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 9:30 AM, David Eads [email protected]
wrote:

@stevekuznetsov https://github.com/stevekuznetsov the groups ones are
pretty clear. We already have oadm groups as a subcommand to drop them
under.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#6276 (comment).

[stevekuznetsov]

@deads2k We are changing the naming, then, are we? From verb-noun to just verb?

$ oadm groups sync
$ oadm groups prune

??

[deads2k]

@deads2k We are changing the naming, then, are we? From verb-noun to just verb?

yeah, that makes sense.

[deads2k]

Other discussion point - moving everything in oadm into "oc cluster *"

I like oadm better. Why would we move it?

[smarterclayton]

oadm would be a symlink to oc admin or something so we could reduce to one
client binary.

On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 10:11 AM, David Eads [email protected]
wrote:

Other discussion point - moving everything in oadm into "oc cluster *"

I like oadm better. Why would we move it?

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#6276 (comment).

[pweil-]

downgrade in priority based on convo with @stevekuznetsov

[smarterclayton]

Why?

On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 11:28 AM, Paul Weil [email protected]
wrote:

downgrade in priority based on convo with @stevekuznetsov
https://github.com/stevekuznetsov

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#6276 (comment).

[smarterclayton]

Need reasons

[stevekuznetsov]

@smarterclayton no migration/promotion of openshift ex validate commands needs to occur. We decided that oadm validate was not correct and that these commands should live as targets for openshift ex diagnostics. In parallel to my original build of openshift ex validate, openshift ex diagnostics maintainer @sosiouxme built node/master config validation targets for openshift ex diagnostics. Therefore, the only action to be taken is to add deprecation messages to openshift ex validate commands and point them to the correct invocation of openshfit ex diagnostics.

[smarterclayton]

What about all the other ex commands?

On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 11:49 AM, Steve Kuznetsov [email protected]
wrote:

@smarterclayton https://github.com/smarterclayton no
migration/promotion of openshift ex validate commands needs to occur. We
decided that oadm validate was not correct and that these commands should
live as targets for openshift ex diagnostics. In parallel to my original
build of openshift ex validate, openshift ex diagnostics maintainer
@sosiouxme https://github.com/sosiouxme built node/master config
validation targets for openshift ex diagnostics. Therefore, the only
action to be taken is to add deprecation messages to openshift ex validate
commands and point them to the correct invocation of openshfit ex
diagnostics.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#6276 (comment).

[stevekuznetsov]

@smarterclayton openshift ex {sync,prune}-groups was promoted already.

[smarterclayton]

And diagnostics?

On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 12:18 PM, Steve Kuznetsov [email protected]
wrote:

@smarterclayton https://github.com/smarterclayton openshift ex
{sync,prune}-groups was promoted already.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#6276 (comment).

[deads2k]

And diagnostics?

Do you think that one is ready?

[stevekuznetsov]

As written by @deads2k here, openshift diagnostics was not listed as a command in need of promotion.

[deads2k]

As a for instance, I think the command arguments should be changed, dropping the --diagnostics flag. (See #6634). I'm pretty sure I'm allowed to drop the flag in openshift ex, but not in oadm, right?

[smarterclayton]

Diagnostics should be moved out of experimental - as long as we think the arguments pattern is right. If we still want to tweak arguments it can miss 3.1.1

[smarterclayton]

Yes, we can wait for 1.2 to promote it.

On Jan 13, 2016, at 1:43 PM, David Eads [email protected] wrote:

As a for instance, I think the command arguments should be changed,
dropping the --diagnostics flag. (See #6634
#6634). I'm pretty sure I'm
allowed to drop the flag in openshift ex, but not in oadm, right?

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#6276 (comment).

[smarterclayton]

This is p1, but all that is left is diagnostics. Assigning to Luke.

[0xmichalis]

This is p1, but all that is left is diagnostics. Assigning to Luke.

I still see a bunch of them under /experimental
https://github.com/openshift/origin/tree/master/pkg/cmd/experimental

[sosiouxme]

On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 12:34 PM, Michail Kargakis <[email protected]

wrote:

I still see a bunch of them under /experimental
https://github.com/openshift/origin/tree/master/pkg/cmd/experimental

I think all will remain for backward compatibility, but most should
probably have deprecation notices and pointers to new location, and I don't
see that for anything but validate and (now) diagnostics. I can do that
if desired...

[sosiouxme]

#7563 merged, is there more to do?

[deads2k]

#7563 merged, is there more to do?

No. build-chain is the only other likely candidate, but we're still talking about a graph API, so I don't see us wanting to promote it yet.

@smarterclayton I want to kill openshift ex tokens validate-token (replaced by oc whoami) and openshift ex tokens request-token (replaced by oc login). Objections?