Skip to content
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

Drop "Custom Projection" #143

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Mar 5, 2021

Conversation

scothis
Copy link
Contributor

@scothis scothis commented Mar 1, 2021

Use "Application Resource Mapping" instead.

Using this PR to start the discussion as to whether we can drop the "Custom Projection" support. Dissatisfaction with "Custom Projection" is what led us to add "Application Resource Mapping" to the spec.

@scothis scothis requested review from arthurdm and nebhale March 1, 2021 21:41
Copy link
Member

@arthurdm arthurdm left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

+1 the configuration / mapping is a much lower bar for non-Pod'specable resources.

Granted that the Custom Projection does allow for a wider set of resources to participate in Service Binding, as there can be resources in the field that are not Pod'specable and also cannot be directly mapped to containers / env / etc - but that does not seem to be a common scenario, and requires their controller to update their code.

@sbose78
Copy link
Contributor

sbose78 commented Mar 4, 2021

This simplifies things a lot 👍

@nebhale nebhale marked this pull request as ready for review March 4, 2021 17:02
@arthurdm arthurdm mentioned this pull request Mar 4, 2021
Use "Application Resource Mapping" instead.

Signed-off-by: Scott Andrews <andrewssc@vmware.com>
@scothis scothis force-pushed the drop-custom-projection branch from 51fda96 to cce5453 Compare March 4, 2021 17:20
@nebhale nebhale merged commit 2bce146 into servicebinding:master Mar 5, 2021
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants