Introduce a plugin mechanism for arbitrary checks during workload admission.

[mwielgus]

What would you like to be added:

A mechanism to admit workloads based on both ClusterQueue quota and checks made by an external controller.

Why is this needed:

The current admission process only checks queue resources and doesn't allow to use some cloud provider API or prometheus database query.

Completion requirements:

This enhancement requires the following artifacts:

• Design doc
• API change
• Docs update

The artifacts should be linked in subsequent comments.

[alculquicondor]

/reopen
Implementation is still ongoing

[k8s-ci-robot]

@alculquicondor: Reopened this issue.

In response to this:

/reopen
Implementation is still ongoing

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.

[trasc]

/assign

[k8s-triage-robot]

The Kubernetes project currently lacks enough contributors to adequately respond to all issues.

This bot triages un-triaged issues according to the following rules:

• After 90d of inactivity, lifecycle/stale is applied
• After 30d of inactivity since lifecycle/stale was applied, lifecycle/rotten is applied
• After 30d of inactivity since lifecycle/rotten was applied, the issue is closed

You can:

• Mark this issue as fresh with /remove-lifecycle stale
• Close this issue with /close
• Offer to help out with Issue Triage

Please send feedback to sig-contributor-experience at kubernetes/community.

/lifecycle stale

[tenzen-y]

/remove-lifecycle stale

[alculquicondor]

/close

This was implemented in 0.5

[k8s-ci-robot]

@alculquicondor: Closing this issue.

In response to this:

/close

This was implemented in 0.5

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.

[tenzen-y]

@alculquicondor IIRC, we're still working on #1178. Or, we should open a separate issue?

[alculquicondor]

Good point, opened #1677.