-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 913
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
Enhance karmadactl operation and maintenance experience #4291
Comments
/priority important-longterm |
One of the goals of improving the operation and maintenance experience of karmadactl this time is to basically replace kubectl. Therefore, I investigated the common commands of kubectl and the current implementation of karmadactl. And the subcommands are simply divided into modification classes and viewing classes. |
modification classes:
|
viewing classes:
|
Here are the design principles I think karmadactl needs to adhere to:
|
Referring to #1568 (comment), I agreed that it is not recommended to use the karmadactl command to modify resources in member cluster. But we still need introduce these commands to change the status of control plane resources. This principle also blocks the problem that after the Propagation Policy is made static, the command |
Let me give it a try. Feel free to collaborate on this issue. |
Can you please share any ideas to address this inconsistency in the commands? I mean which behavior would be appropriate to implement to make the commands more consistent? |
Hi @Affan-7 , Thank you for your positive attitude. You can think from your perspective about what capabilities |
I think is should wait for the @zhzhuang-zju to propose a design. |
Can I work on the |
Sure, very welcome~you can open an issue first to describe your design. |
cc @hulizhe This is my previous summary of the current implementation of |
What subcommands do we expect to implement in this release (Karmada v1.11) ? |
I've implemented |
thanks~ I will combine this issue to sort out the current implementation and expected performance of |
/close |
@zhzhuang-zju: Closing this issue. In response to this:
Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository. |
What would you like to be added:
In daily use of karmadactl, I found that karmadactl supports fewer subcommands and cannot be used completely without kubectl. And the designs of different subcommands are inconsistent. For example, without presenting flag
--cluster
in the subcommandapply
represents no specific cluster, but in the subcommandget pod
it represents all clusters. This will cause confusion for users.So, in this issue, I hope to discuss how to improve the operation and maintenance experience of karmadactl and establish unified design principles. This will be a huge, long-term and interesting project.
Why is this needed:
improve the operation and maintenance experience of karmadactl and establish unified design principles.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: