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

📖 Add side-by-side comparison of MachinePools and MachineDeployments in docs #7354

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Oct 8, 2022

Conversation

Jont828
Copy link
Contributor

@Jont828 Jont828 commented Oct 5, 2022

What this PR does / why we need it:

Which issue(s) this PR fixes (optional, in fixes #<issue number>(, fixes #<issue_number>, ...) format, will close the issue(s) when PR gets merged):
Fixes #4288

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. size/S Denotes a PR that changes 10-29 lines, ignoring generated files. labels Oct 5, 2022
@fabriziopandini
Copy link
Member

Thanks!
/lgtm

/cc @CecileRobertMichon @richardcase

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Oct 6, 2022
Copy link
Contributor

@killianmuldoon killianmuldoon left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

/lgtm

| Each MachinePool requires only a single BootstrapConfig. | Each MachineDeployment uses an InfraMachineTemplate and a BootstrapConfigTemplate, and each Machine requires a unique BootstrapConfig. |
| Maintains a list of instances in the `providerIDList` field in the MachinePool spec. This list is populated based on the response from the infrastructure provider. | Maintains a list of instances through the Machine resources owned by the MachineSet. |

<!-- TODO: should we add MachinePoolMachines? -->
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I don't think it's required here until the implementation is further along, but definitely a TODO for future.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@mboersma FYI

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot removed the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Oct 6, 2022
Copy link
Contributor

@CecileRobertMichon CecileRobertMichon left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

lgtm

@Jont828 can you please squash commits?

@Jont828
Copy link
Contributor Author

Jont828 commented Oct 7, 2022

Sure thing!

@CecileRobertMichon
Copy link
Contributor

Thank you!

/lgtm
/approve

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Oct 8, 2022
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: CecileRobertMichon

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Oct 8, 2022
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot merged commit c9b4a0f into kubernetes-sigs:main Oct 8, 2022
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added this to the v1.3 milestone Oct 8, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. size/S Denotes a PR that changes 10-29 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Add a side by side comparison of MachinePools and MachineDeployments in book
5 participants