Skip to content
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

support namespaceselectors for cluster propagation policies #6016

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

grosser
Copy link
Contributor

@grosser grosser commented Jan 4, 2025

What type of PR is this?

/kind feature

What this PR does / why we need it:

we want to match a clusterpropagationpolicy to resources in only some namespaces

Special notes for your reviewer:
POC, need comments on if this makes sense and ideas on how to get the namespace object

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?:


@karmada-bot karmada-bot added the kind/feature Categorizes issue or PR as related to a new feature. label Jan 4, 2025
@karmada-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by:
Once this PR has been reviewed and has the lgtm label, please assign kevin-wangzefeng for approval. For more information see the Kubernetes Code Review Process.

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

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

@karmada-bot karmada-bot added the size/S Denotes a PR that changes 10-29 lines, ignoring generated files. label Jan 4, 2025
@karmada-bot karmada-bot added size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files. and removed size/S Denotes a PR that changes 10-29 lines, ignoring generated files. labels Jan 4, 2025
@grosser grosser changed the title Grosser/ns support namespaceselectors for cluster propagation policies Jan 4, 2025
Copy link
Member

@XiShanYongYe-Chang XiShanYongYe-Chang left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

For users, this increases the flexibility of pp use, but increases the complexity of pp and provides the complexity of the system. Can we consider extending a layer above pp and leaving clear resource descriptions to pp?

@XiShanYongYe-Chang
Copy link
Member

/cc @RainbowMango

@grosser
Copy link
Contributor Author

grosser commented Jan 4, 2025

afaik this only makes sense for cpps, but since they share the resource selector with pp I opted to not duplicate everything

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
kind/feature Categorizes issue or PR as related to a new feature. size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants