-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 369
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
Remove outdated TODO comment #777
Remove outdated TODO comment #777
Conversation
Unknown CLA label state. Rechecking for CLA labels. Send feedback to sig-contributor-experience at kubernetes/community. /check-cla |
/lgtm |
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: ahmetb, JohnTitor 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 |
@ahmetb Hey, by the way, I'm interested in sig-cli and krew itself. Could you sponsor me to join? I have one sponsor now. |
I personally expect some medium to long-term contribution cadence rather than a short term commit burst. A lot of the Krew work today happens in krew-index as the source code has been fairly stable for some years. That work is largely manual and requires understanding the plugin ecosystem, what do we allow and whatnot. While I appreciate you going through the code and fixing up a ton of stuff, I also need to make sure this is not a temporary thing to sponsor. :) |
^ btw here I mostly mean sponsorship for being a Krew maintainer, sig-cli member sponsorship can be easier and I can vouch for that. But what are you actually getting out of it. :) |
Makes sense to me! I asked because sig-cli and krew are some of my interests in joining and contributing to the community. So, I'd like to see how things (krew and other CLIs) are going and get my feet wetter (and find what's the best way to contribute to krew in the medium term) as a sig-cli member (half of my reasons is to get rid of |
This comment was written in fa9866f, now we don't have these two funcs and the architecture seems fine.