enhancements/template: Fix maturity-levels link #114
Conversation
openshift-ci-robot
added
the
size/S
enhancements/template.md
Outdated
| enhancement: | ||
| - Maturity levels - `Dev Preview`, `Tech Preview`, `GA` | ||
| - Deprecation | ||
| - [Maturity levels (`alpha`, `beta`, `stable`)][maturity-levels] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
we don't have alpha, beta, stable. We have dev preview, tech preview, and GA.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
we don't have alpha, beta, stable...
Even if we don't add any, we still supply upstream Kubernetes features which are alpha/beta/stable.
We have dev preview, tech preview, and GA
Do we have docs for that? I looked (references in the topic comment), and found nothing on dev-preview and little on tech-preview.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
There's another PR to document tech preview guidelines -- #104
|
It looks like this will need a rebase. Since the broken link has remained in the template, it has now been copied into 14 enhancements. Oops. PR #104 was posted to document what tech preview means, so we'll need to revive that. I find the alpha/beta/GA references helpful too, since we sometimes refer to the status of features upstream. I think for the purposes of resolving this PR, we can fix the busted link, point to upstream guidelines, and also note that there is an openshift dev preview / tech preview / GA distinction (but don't block on definining them in this PR). |
wking
force-pushed
the
maturity-levels-link
branch
from
dd122b9 to
7ceb598
Compare
The broken link is from 881dbb7 (Add initial enhancement templates, 2019-08-23, openshift#2), with a sloppy copy from [1]. I'm fixing with a verbatim copy from the KEP template (and dropping template-only stuff from the user-workload-monitoring enhancement). This is a bit of a semantic change from what we had previously. The OpenShift vs. Kubernetes maturity levels are not clear to me. OpenShift does have docs on GA and later [2], and we do have docs on using Technology Preview features [3], but I have not turned up docs for what Technology preview means in terms of maturity/support. But even if there is a Kubernetes / OpenShift maturity distinction, OpenShift is going to expose Kubernetes features before they go stable. And we use v1beta1 and whatnot for OpenShift configs. So I don't think we can drop the Kubernetes maturity references altogether, although we can add OpenShift maturity references in addition (once we find out what to reference). I also went through existing enhancements and removed useless copies of the template boilerplate, to make it more clear that those particular enhancements did not have anything to say about graduation criteria. [1]: https://github.com/kubernetes/enhancements/blame/f1a799d5f4658ed29797c1fb9ceb7a4d0f538e93/keps/YYYYMMDD-kep-template.md#L216-L221 [2]: https://access.redhat.com/support/policy/updates/openshift/ [3]: https://docs.openshift.com/container-platform/4.2/nodes/clusters/nodes-cluster-enabling-features.html#nodes-cluster-features-about_nodes-cluster-enabling
wking
force-pushed
the
maturity-levels-link
branch
from
7ceb598 to
4fdca37
Compare
|
/approve |
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: russellb, wking The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. The pull request process is described here DetailsNeeds approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
openshift-ci-robot
added
the
approved
6 participants
The broken link is from 881dbb7 (#2), with a sloppy copy from the KEP template. I'm fixing with a verbatim copy from the KEP template (and dropping template-only stuff from the user-workload-monitoring enhancement). This is a bit of a semantic change from what we had previously. The OpenShift vs. Kubernetes maturity levels are not clear to me. OpenShift does have docs on GA and later, and we do have docs on using Technology Preview features, but I have not turned up docs for what Technology preview means in terms of maturity/support.
But even if there is a Kubernetes / OpenShift maturity distinction, OpenShift is going to expose Kubernetes features before they go stable. And we use v1beta1 and whatnot for OpenShift configs. So I don't think we can drop the Kubernetes maturity references altogether, although we can add OpenShift maturity references in addition (once we find out what to reference).
/assign @derekwaynecarr