-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 220
chore: cleanup operator-framework-core pom #518
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
chore: cleanup operator-framework-core pom #518
Conversation
operator-framework-core/pom.xml
Outdated
@@ -61,12 +53,16 @@ | |||
<dependencies> | |||
<dependency> | |||
<groupId>io.fabric8</groupId> | |||
<artifactId>openshift-client</artifactId> | |||
<artifactId>kubernetes-client</artifactId> |
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.
We should keep the OpenShift client here so that apps can get the more featured version if needed.
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.
fixed
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 don't really get this argument. Is there more features in openshift client?
This could be confusing for the users, at least shuold be documented. Also could be replaces in operators with maven if somebody want to use openshift client.
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.
There's more feature in the OpenShift client because it provides access to OpenShift-only resources in addition to the plain Kubernetes one. I don't think it causes any confusion as people can interact with this client the exact same way they would with the plain version. Replacing the client in not necessarily that trivial depending on how you do it and this is the easiest/simplest way to have broader support at this time.
Personally, I'd rather see the OpenShift client implemented as an add-on on top of the plain Kubernetes one but I'm not sure that's feasible at this point.
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.
Can we put this there in form of a comment above this dependency for the users which are not necessary familiar with the relation of these clients?
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 can include a comment in this pr, what would you like me to add ?
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.
Basically what @metacosm mentioned. That "We use openshift client, because functionally it a superset of kubernetes client.". Thank you!
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.
done
1747556
to
604078e
Compare
604078e
to
a44c965
Compare
No description provided.