-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 243
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
Support dynamic devfile registry #2635
Comments
we need to consider how we would handle conflicting devfiles ( having same named devfiles ) in different devfile registries. |
Yes, I think the rough design would be in our metadata we can append devfile registry information to devfile to address this, so should be something like:
|
That would resolve the conflict while storing them, but how would be decide which one the user wants when they give a conflicting devfile as input? Would the user provide the whole |
That conflict problem can be resolved by our original draft design here: #2608 (comment), which the current workspace/environment only sticks to one registry via preference/environment configuration (TBD). |
Example of how this could work as discussed in odo contributor call
|
NEW DESIGN summary based on today's discussion. Requirements:
Designs:
Handle name conflict: |
Idea of listing devfiles from multiple registries seems a bit counter-intuitive to me as a user. IMO, when user does Also, thinking of this from the IDE plugin point of view, I think it would make things simple for the end-user to have a registry configured in odo preferences. A CLI flag could override the registry to be used, but the |
We should consider support the secured devfile registry, we may do some research to check if there are some go packages that support https with self-signed certificate. |
@dharmit I bring the multiple registries support topic up in our this week's contributors meeting, from @kadel 's point of view, we should support that since Che support that as well, which means user can enable multiple registries and view/create component from multiple registries. I agree it's a little bit complicated from use case perspective, but it does provide more flexibility for user. |
IMO, the flexibility is not worth it if it makes things complex for the end-user. We can still support a dynamic devfile registry by letting user specify registry of their choice on CLI: In any case (with or without |
@dharmit I rethink this design, actually I don't think display components with their registries via That being said, you can still bring more concerns up in the next contributors meeting, we have multiple architects in that meeting, the current design is agreed by all architects now, but feel free to arise another discussion there |
How can be self-signed considered secured? |
I see your point but I think that it will limit the usefulness of the devfile registries. |
Yeah, sorry for the confusion, that comment is just to let us keep in mind we should support secured registry, self-signed is just a start and we can use that for testing purpose for the timing being, finally we should support and test CA certificate for sure. |
Nope, I'd not like it if my Fedora system had only one registry. But I think the scenario we have resembles more with listing/searching container images from a container registry than listing rpms from a repo. Going with multiple devfile registries just feels counter intuitive to me. And it's very likely that it's just me. It also asks for the code to consider various scenarios. And not to forget the plugins that would be built on top of odo. To choose IMO, let's go with what's been discussed already among the stakeholders/teams. We can always change the way we do things based on the user feedback we might receive. 😉 Thanks for patiently answering @GeekArthur & @kadel. |
We have discussed about a new command design today for dynamic registry support, so currently we have two designs Design 1:
Design 2:
IMO, Design 1 is more readable and clear to user but it introduces many new arguments and makes the command more complicated. Design 2 is more centralized and consistent with the existing |
We discussed the commands design in today's contributor call, here is the latest commands design:
|
@cdrage FYI, I add the design documentation for dynamic registry support https://docs.google.com/document/d/10a7xm5ynJa7asrY63xxjICmCwCRCUXTdO31bGb57-1E/edit?usp=sharing, you can use that as reference when you update the odo documentation https://odo.dev/ if it's necessary. |
Thank you. I've merged in: #3045 Once your PR for the code has been merged in, can you please push some documentation to: https://github.com/openshift/odo/blob/master/docs/public/deploying-a-devfile-using-odo.adoc ? |
Yup, will do that. |
User Story
As a user I want to use devfile from different registries to build and deploy devfile component so that odo should have a mechanism to let user specify the registry for registry flexibility.
Acceptance Criteria
Design documentation: https://docs.google.com/document/d/10a7xm5ynJa7asrY63xxjICmCwCRCUXTdO31bGb57-1E/edit?usp=sharing
Links
odo catalog list components command output improvement #2608
Create component support for odo devfile scenario #2557
/kind user-story
/area devfile
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: