-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 493
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
doc: gwctl - improve readme, add Makefile #2706
doc: gwctl - improve readme, add Makefile #2706
Conversation
Signed-off-by: Navendu Pottekkat <navendu@apache.org>
Welcome @pottekkat! |
Hi @pottekkat. Thanks for your PR. I'm waiting for a kubernetes-sigs member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the I understand the commands that are listed here. 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/test-infra repository. |
Hi, I have a question. gwctl should be in a separate repository similar to https://github.com/kubernetes-sigs/ingress2gateway, right? Is there any particular reason why it is kept here? Having a separate repository could make it easier to manage. I can help improve gwctl, as mentioned by @robscott in this comment: #2428 (comment). But I don't see any open issues. Do you think I should create them? Some of the problems I think we need to fix initially are:
I think these are reasonable first steps, and after this, we can proceed as mentioned in the comment by sketching out a desired UX to be a drop-in replacement for Let me know what you think and I can fix these! |
Another thing here is that if we are running |
Thanks @pottekkat! /assign @gauravkghildiyal |
/ok-to-test |
I think that when we started work on gwctl, the reason we've put it in this repo is so that it eventually ends up getting released at the same time and version as the API. I also updated the title to make it clearer that this is for |
Thanks @pottekkat! This LGTM. /lgtm Yes I have an upcoming PR (should be out this week) to discuss and document the next steps of gwctl, which will be followed by the creation of the relevant issues. This should help facilitate contributions towards a common goal from everyone community :) |
Thanks @pottekkat! /approve |
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: pottekkat, robscott The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. The pull request process is described here
Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
@gauravkghildiyal That sounds great! I would like to get involved. I was also working on a PR to organize the code better and fail gracefully with better error messages. I can also open that PR. |
That's great! I can only hope you don't run into issues with the changes from #2708 I'm trying to get this in sooner so it unblocks other development. Otherwise someone will have to deal with lots of merge conflicts :) |
Hmmm I don't think the /retest |
I did not notice #2708 before. I will wait till it is merged before I open the other PR. |
What type of PR is this?
/kind documentation
What this PR does / why we need it:
Adds a basic Makefile to build the gwctl binary and improves the documentation in the readme.
Which issue(s) this PR fixes: none
Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?: