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

Improve Dup Checking Solution for Projects and Namespaces #9

Open
sostheim opened this issue Sep 11, 2017 · 1 comment
Open

Improve Dup Checking Solution for Projects and Namespaces #9

sostheim opened this issue Sep 11, 2017 · 1 comment
Assignees

Comments

@sostheim
Copy link
Owner

sostheim commented Sep 11, 2017

Currently the system does a very simple, to simple, brute force search for duplicate terms in the kraken configuration files. If a duplicate is detected, the action is rejected.

  1. Need to improve the communication of the status on a duplicate instance to the client

  2. Need to improve the fidelity of checking for duplicate names to understand the object and it's context before rejecting the action

  3. Need to add user documentation to inform client's of the API what the rules are concerning duplicate, e.g. naming requirements.

@sostheim
Copy link
Owner Author

Example:

Attempting to add the project/namespace acme is rejected for a completely unnecessary reason (a textual match), on string acme due to the following stanza in the configuration file.

        - name: kube-lego
          registry: quay.io
          chart: samsung_cnct/kube-lego
          version: '0.0.5-0'
          namespace: ingress
          values:
            image: "jetstack/kube-lego:0.1.4"
            email: letsencrypt@reactioncommerce.com
            domain: launchdock.io
            # api: "https://acme-colonybead.api.letsencrypt.org/directory"
            api: "https://acme-v01.api.letsencrypt.org/directory"

@sostheim sostheim self-assigned this Sep 11, 2017
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant