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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
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 this to support a kubelet root directory alternative to the default
/var/lib/kubelet(i.e., your deployment of kubelet diverges from the default)?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.
@timoreimann yeah if that’s ok.
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.
I can totally see how you (and others) may want to use a non-standard directory. What I'm not too sure about is whether adding additional mount points is the right way to achieve that. At the least, it could be surprising/confusing to users to see several mounts where only one is effectively used.
My suggestion would be to keep the manifests as-is and adjust your local copy to your needs. It's also possible to use one of the many manifest management tools out there to keep upstream (i.e., our manifests) unchanged and put customizations on top in a maintainable fashion. Examples are kustomize, kpt, and ytt.
Let me know if that works for you.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
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.
The current changes should work out-of-the box across all environments and configs. If we want something easy
without adding additional work on the end-user.
If we want something where the user must override then we must have a supported deployment mechanism that can be templatized or passed based on the environment being deployed. Ideally, these kustomizations or whatever method should be kept at the upstream directory of digital ocean
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 should agree on that tooling first
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.
Alternatively, an operator is the best option but that is more work
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.
Right, the approach to customize depends a lot on the tool. For instance, kustomize and kpt can operate on upstream resources that don't support customization whatsoever, whereas Helm charts are (to my knowledge) usually bundled with the upstream source.
We also had an external contributor starting the work to support Helm (#382) but unfortunately couldn't carry the effort onward anymore due to time constraints. We'd be happy to see other contributors step up.