-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 106
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
Chatops integration #55
Conversation
Thank you @armab for the suggestions. I ended up doing that after tested the other approaches. as suggested, This is a base for discussions/suggestions. I took this repository as a stepping stone for the new integration, There aren't much of diversion from it; However, there might be unnecessary values passed around which is left for cleaning up. Corresponding st2-dockerfile PR In my approach I am using st2chatops package. TBD if there's a better source. I probably need a few more days to bring it to a clean state, feedback, contributions very welcome as I won't be able to commit time next week. If there's a better/alternative approach, feel free to close 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.
Can you please sync-up your branch with the upstream master
, so we'll see only the diff from this specific change?
Hey Sure,
This branch is outdated as I worked on it locally. Will push changes later today.
Thanks
… On Mar 19, 2019, at 8:12 PM, Eugen C. ***@***.***> wrote:
@armab requested changes on this pull request.
Can you please sync-up your branch with the upstream master, so we'll see only the diff from this specific change?
—
You are receiving this because you commented.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#55 (review)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AE_WySOXcphnXbPpGdU3hKtUqL2_3-Vhks5vYTaCgaJpZM4b2w-r>.
|
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.
Thanks for the contribution! 👍
I provided some first early comments that'll help to course correct and move forward future st2chatops
support in ST2 K8s/Helm.
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.
At a high level, I see it as the following way to configure chatops via Helm values.yaml
[....]
# StackStorm ChatOps (https://docs.stackstorm.com/chatops/index.html)
# As hubot can't be HA scaled properly, we deploy only single replica of st2chatops
st2chatops:
# Enable st2chatops (default: false)
enabled: true
# Custom hubot adapter ENV variables to pass through which will override st2chatops.env defaults.
# See https://github.com/StackStorm/st2chatops/blob/master/st2chatops.env
# for the full list of supported adapters and example ENV variables.
env:
HUBOT_ADAPTER: slack
HUBOT_SLACK_TOKEN: xoxb-CHANGE-ME-PLEASE
# Use custom generated st2chatops Docker image
image:
# repository: stackstorm
# name: st2chatops
# tag: {{ .Chart.AppVersion }}
# pullPolicy: Always
resources: {}
# Additional advanced settings to control pod/deployment placement
nodeSelector: {}
tolerations: []
affinity: {}
Meaning we'll pass additional/custom ENV variables to st2chatops
container that will be applied on top of defaults. This brings flexibility of configuring any existing or future added new adapters like StackStorm/st2chatops#121
Looks like the fork/branch still needs to be synced with upstream properly as Github diff shows unrelated to this PR changes https://github.com/StackStorm/stackstorm-ha/pull/55/files |
Since I'm try
Might it happen because I have local branch set to something other than
git remote -v shows
|
@armab |
@armab @warrenvw I tried syncing with upstream and after some-time wrestling, I think this is best I got. I am not sure if that's updated since I see merging blocks. But I have an idea. If you agree you can open a new branch for chops so the community can directly contribute to. I think that'll save us time. I also was able to deploy to k8 while pulling the image of the st2-docker file. I added some cleanups on my code which I will cherry peak into the new branch. ** Sorry about any type while mobile, I'll fix it later** |
@rapittdev As I see, the github diff still shows old content that was already contributed to upstream |
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.
Thank you. With help from the StackStrom community, we were able to deploy to k8. This is still a wimp since we're waiting for feedback on how to proceed.
@mosn Thank you for starting this K8s Chatops work, making changes and bringing this feature to a working state! Appreciate your contribution 👍 Just added a little bit of polishing here and there and tried to find possible corner cases. One of them is reported in StackStorm/st2chatops#124 |
@armab I'll be able to start the integration at 15:00 CET. I will provide updates as I progress through the implementation. |
Cluster is ready based on following best practice https://github.com/bitnami/kube-prod-runtime/blob/master/docs/quickstart-gke.md Going to start with Stackstorm and chatops now |
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! Well done. 👍
The code is easy to understand.
it works great too! @armab I had to move to EWC 3.0 because of this. So far the improved workflow was able to do 5 hours job in 30min. Very helpful with a syntax error. As for chatops I'll finish converting all my mistral chains and then look at that, hopefully, I can work out detailed feedback later in this week. Just quick info, the description for this chart is an accurate description of my experience. |
Closes #17
Proposal for chatops integration base on #17
As mentioned in the tracking issue:
st2docs
find out more about the why here