Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
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
(feat): (testing): Add extensible unpacking interface + controller tests #65
(feat): (testing): Add extensible unpacking interface + controller tests #65
Changes from 8 commits
fdd0f2c
00490ce
8139725
a8dd3c9
dd71148
66586db
cdc5d15
d0fe3b3
fbf0653
2868d7f
79d2334
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
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.
Is the switch to pods instead of jobs only because rukpak provisioner uses an unpack pod instead of a job? This may have subtle but salient implications for catalogd due to the fact that there's product level differences between bundle images and catalog images. For eg, bundle images are generally publicly pull-able(at least has been advised to be that way, but that's totally up for debate possible in v1), however, catalog images are private/public, and private images will need pull secrets to be pulled, that's easily passable to a Job, vs a pod that needs additional configuration in the code.
With that context, think more differences between bundle and catalog images showing up, and therefore the unpack pod needing to be more and more configured in code with for each difference.
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.
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.
Since we are pretty much copying the logic that rukpak uses internally and rukpak uses a Pod instead of Job, yes.
I'm not entirely sure I am following here. With FBC aren't catalog images just going to be images that contain a specific directory/file structure? IIUC this is exactly what a bundle is just on a smaller scale and the files are instead Kubernetes manifests. I understand that there are different views on what a catalog vs a bundle is, hence the creation of a
Catalog
API, but at the end of the day their base architecture follows a similar pattern of putting everything as files in a filesystem and they are just read accordingly. I don't think we should embed any specific logic to differentiate between a catalog and a bundle as IMO it just adds unnecessary complexity. IMO someone should actually be able to put an image reference that references a bundle image instead of a catalog image and catalogd should still successfully be able to "unpack" it. The place where it should fail is when attempting to render contents that would only exist in a catalog.@joelanford also makes good points - for reference, a Pod using a pull secret looks something like (Kubernetes docs on this):
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.
We've been bitten too many times for using pods directly instead of existing Kubernetes primitives in v0. When trying to use the pull secret example, I wasn't trying to suggest that you cannot do that with pods, but to the fact that the job/deployment controller does exactly that, pass on the pull secret to the pod it creates, but instead of letting the job/deployment controller do that we sign up for doing that ourselves, and then have to keep including tasks like this in our controller that we could have just delegated to the existing controllers. Eg tomorrow if there's a policy change that requires change in how pods are bootstrapped (think something similar to PSA), then there'll be three controllers incorporating those changes: the jobs controller, the deployment controller, and our controller. And then we have to worry about OCP releases/backports etc etc. Instead, using Kubernetes primitives mean we make minimal changes on our controller to incorporate policy changes, the same change that every other project will be making.
But, sounds like we need to have this discussion in rukpak instead.
Not resolving the conversation now so that we remember to capture this in an issue in rukpak by referencing this later.