Thoughts on spec for types with no status?
45 views
Skip to first unread message
Tim Hockin
Aug 15, 2018, 2:19:36 PM8/15/18
to kubernetes-a...@googlegroups.com
What is our thinking about API types for which there is no status.
Consider ConfigMap (also applicable to other CRDs).
In hindsight would we nest the `data` under a `spec` block for
consistency across all types, or do we want stronger guidance about
when it's ok not to have `spec` ?
Current doc says:
Objects whose state cannot vary from the user's desired intent MAY
have only "spec", and MAY rename "spec" to a more appropriate name
Consider ConfigMap (also applicable to other CRDs).
In hindsight would we nest the `data` under a `spec` block for
consistency across all types, or do we want stronger guidance about
when it's ok not to have `spec` ?
Current doc says:
Objects whose state cannot vary from the user's desired intent MAY
have only "spec", and MAY rename "spec" to a more appropriate name
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages