You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
This issue is not requesting templating, unstuctured edits, build-time side-effects from args or env vars, or any other eschewed feature.
What would you like to have added?
I want to add an ability to use redirect in resource loading process.
For example I have a git repo over special proxy which change branch to directory which contains kustomization.yaml
In kustomization.yaml I have resources
SIG CLI takes a lead on issue triage for this repo, but any Kubernetes member can accept issues by applying the triage/accepted label.
The triage/accepted label can be added by org members by writing /triage accepted in a comment.
Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository.
Eschewed features
What would you like to have added?
I want to add an ability to use redirect in resource loading process.
For example I have a git repo over special proxy which change branch to directory which contains
kustomization.yaml
In
kustomization.yaml
I have resourcesProxy return http redirect to
https://git.org.com/group/project.git?ref=main-client1
and kustomize load resources from that
https://git.org.com/group/project.git?ref=main-client1
repoTo implement that I want to fix some code here
kustomize/api/internal/loader/fileloader.go
Line 320 in 2e6171a
Why is this needed?
It gives more flexiable resource management and exclude some plugins
Can you accomplish the motivating task without this feature, and if so, how?
I can't. Sorry.
What other solutions have you considered?
I try to return new
kustomization.yaml
from proxy with new resources link asbut it does not work because kustomize can use kustomization only from folder
This scenario repeat for
components
Anything else we should know?
I think no
Feature ownership
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: