Set recommended kubernetes labels on services and workflows #482

rgolangh · 2024-06-06T19:02:51Z

Motivation

There's a need to select efficiently workflows and their respective
services. Having the common kubernetes labels allow a single selector:

   podSelector:
     matchExpressions:
       - { key: app.kubernetes.io/component, operator: In, values:
         ["data-index-service", "jobs-service", "serverless-workflow"] }

Modification:
Make the v1.Deployment for services and the deployment or knative
services to contain at common labels

Result:
A workflow deployment or knative serving labels:

    app.kubernetes.io/name: ${workflow name}
    app.kubernetes.io/component: serverless-workflow
    app.kubernetes.io/part-of: ${platform url set by status}
    app.kubernetes.io/managed-by: sonataflow-operator

Data index or Jobs services Deployment.v1 labels:

    app.kubernetes.io/name: ${service name}
    app.kubernetes.io/component: data-index-service|jobs-service
    app.kubernetes.io/part-of: ${platform name}
    app.kubernetes.io/managed-by: sonataflow-operator

Reference: https://kubernetes.io/docs/concepts/overview/working-with-objects/common-labels/#labels

Fixes: #483
Signed-off-by: Roy Golan [email protected]

ricardozanini · 2024-06-06T19:26:40Z

Thanks @rgolangh!

A future improvement will be to pass the platform name to the workflow
so app.kubernetes.io/part-of will have the platform name so we can
select all component for a platform.

Can't you do this in this PR?

controllers/platform/k8s.go

workflowproj/operator.go

rgolangh · 2024-06-07T06:11:39Z

For most of the code path it is easy except the various config maps factories in workflowproj/operator.go I can ignore the platform for those as a compromise

…

On Thu, 6 Jun 2024 at 22:28 Ricardo Zanini ***@***.***> wrote: ***@***.**** commented on this pull request. ------------------------------ In controllers/platform/k8s.go <#482 (comment)> : > + "app.kubernetes.io/name": psh.GetServiceName(), + "app.kubernetes.io/component": psh.GetContainerName(), + "app.kubernetes.io/part-of": platform.Name, + "app.kubernetes.io/managed-by": "sonataflow-operator", Please add these to https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-serverless-operator/blob/main/api/metadata/annotations.go#L22 ------------------------------ In workflowproj/operator.go <#482 (comment)> : > @@ -85,8 +85,12 @@ func GetManagedPropertiesFileName(workflow *operatorapi.SonataFlow) string { // GetDefaultLabels gets the default labels based on the given workflow. func GetDefaultLabels(workflow *operatorapi.SonataFlow) map[string]string { return map[string]string{ - LabelApp: workflow.Name, - LabelWorkflow: workflow.Name, + LabelApp: workflow.Name, + LabelWorkflow: workflow.Name, + "app.kubernetes.io/name": workflow.Name, + "app.kubernetes.io/component": "serverless-workflow", + "app.kubernetes.io/part-of": workflow.Status.Services.DataIndexRef.Url, How hard it's to get the platform name here? — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#482 (review)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABGBYHASWTNTNDT2WMCB55TZGCZ7DAVCNFSM6AAAAABI5J3EHWVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43YUDVNRWFEZLROVSXG5CSMV3GSZLXHMZDCMBTGA2DANJXGQ> . You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: <apache/incubator-kie-kogito-serverless-operator/pull/482/review/2103040574 @github.com>

wmedvede

LGTM, just the same comment about te part-of

rgolangh · 2024-06-07T11:30:39Z

LGTM, just the same comment about te part-of

i would have to get the active platform set in the workflow reconciler and then pass it on to the rest of the state ensurers
some of them already do it i think
wdyt?

ricardozanini · 2024-06-07T13:28:18Z

@rgolangh

For most of the code path it is easy except the various config maps
factories in workflowproj/operator.go

The workflowproj won't care about the platform AFAIK, so what we can do is to add a Platform argument to the constructors so a client can pass the platform (e.g. kn cli) when generating the manifests.

rgolangh · 2024-06-07T14:24:41Z

I set it to wip as it became bit messy. Please give quick feedback if you can on the idea of that refactoring.
I think I want to leave only a single ensurer that has the platform . same for the object creator. that should remove some uneeded code
I had a place or two that are used just to generate the workflowproj so not in real deployment time. like @ricardozanini mentioned

ricardozanini

@rgolangh I'll refactor the code to add the platform reference to the SonataFlow object. Then we can return to this feature, wdyt? That will ease your implementation and we can avoid passing the platform reference everywhere.

controllers/profiles/common/ensurer.go

ricardozanini · 2024-06-11T18:47:50Z

@rgolangh this PR should ease your work:

Fix #484 - 🔗 Add platform reference to workflow status condition #485

ricardozanini · 2024-06-17T18:07:24Z

@rgolangh can you rebase and implement based on my PR?

rgolangh · 2024-06-18T16:10:05Z

Thanks @Zanini I rebased on your changes and rolled back most of the previous changes

ricardozanini · 2024-06-19T11:22:04Z

@rgolangh can you please check the unit tests? Also, before sending the PR do:

make generate-all
make vet fmt

I need to update the CONTRIB guide.

ricardozanini · 2024-06-20T13:01:37Z

@rgolangh can you check the tests?

rgolangh · 2024-06-20T13:25:41Z

oh I now see that `make test` only tests the api/ folder and not the rest. So I saw everything working locally and overlooked the PR

…

On Thu, 20 Jun 2024 at 16:02, Ricardo Zanini ***@***.***> wrote: @rgolangh <https://github.com/rgolangh> can you check the tests? — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#482 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABGBYHGLYICNIBEBGLEI7SLZILHERAVCNFSM6AAAAABI5J3EHWVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDCOBQGYZDOMRRGE> . You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: <apache/incubator-kie-kogito-serverless-operator/pull/482/c2180627211@ github.com>

ricardozanini · 2024-06-20T14:08:50Z

oh I now see that make test only tests the api/ folder and not the rest.

wdym? make test runs everything, including the api module.

rgolangh · 2024-06-20T14:12:13Z

oh I now see that make test only tests the api/ folder and not the rest.

wdym? make test runs everything, including the api module.

from the Makefile

test: manifests generate envtest vet fmt test-api ## Run tests.
...
test-api:
	cd api && make test

ricardozanini · 2024-06-20T14:14:00Z

Yes, it runs everything.

controllers/platform/k8s.go

ricardozanini · 2024-06-20T14:27:35Z

Yes, it runs everything.

it stays on the api folder after the cd I think

It does not, just tested here:

make test
test -s /Users/ricferna/go/src/github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-serverless-operator/bin/controller-gen || GOBIN=/Users/ricferna/go/src/github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-serverless-operator/bin go install sigs.k8s.io/controller-tools/cmd/[email protected]
/Users/ricferna/go/src/github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-serverless-operator/bin/controller-gen object:headerFile="hack/boilerplate.go.txt" paths="./api/..." paths="./container-builder/api/..."
/Users/ricferna/go/src/github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-serverless-operator/bin/controller-gen rbac:roleName=manager-role crd:allowDangerousTypes=true webhook paths="./api/..." paths="./internal/controller/..." output:crd:artifacts:config=config/crd/bases
go vet ./...
./hack/goimports.sh
api/v1alpha08/zz_generated.deepcopy.go
api/zz_generated.deepcopy.go
container-builder/api/zz_generated.deepcopy.go
go work sync
go: downloading github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-serverless-operator/workflowproj v0.0.0
go mod tidy
go fmt ./...
cd api && make test
go test github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-serverless-operator/api github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-serverless-operator/api/metadata github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-serverless-operator/api/v1alpha08 -coverprofile cover.out
        github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-serverless-operator/api          coverage: 0.0% of statements
ok      github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-serverless-operator/api/metadata 0.378s  coverage: 57.1% of statements
ok      github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-serverless-operator/api/v1alpha08        0.959s  coverage: 4.7% of statements
KUBEBUILDER_ASSETS="/Users/ricferna/go/src/github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-serverless-operator/bin/k8s/1.26.1-darwin-amd64" go test github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-serverless-operator/cmd github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-serverless-operator/internal/controller github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-serverless-operator/internal/controller/builder github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-serverless-operator/internal/controller/cfg github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-serverless-operator/internal/controller/clusterplatform github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-serverless-operator/internal/controller/discovery github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-serverless-operator/internal/controller/knative github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-serverless-operator/internal/controller/openshift github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-serverless-operator/internal/controller/platform github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-serverless-operator/internal/controller/platform/services github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-serverless-operator/internal/controller/profiles github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-serverless-operator/internal/controller/profiles/common github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-serverless-operator/internal/controller/profiles/common/constants github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-serverless-operator/internal/controller/profiles/common/persistence github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-serverless-operator/internal/controller/profiles/common/properties github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-serverless-operator/internal/controller/profiles/common/variables github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-serverless-operator/internal/controller/profiles/dev github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-serverless-operator/internal/controller/profiles/factory github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-serverless-operator/internal/controller/profiles/gitops github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-serverless-operator/internal/controller/profiles/preview github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-serverless-operator/internal/controller/workflowdef github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-serverless-operator/internal/controller/workflows github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-serverless-operator/log github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-serverless-operator/test github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-serverless-operator/utils github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-serverless-operator/utils/kubernetes github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-serverless-operator/utils/openshift github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-serverless-operator/utils/resources github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-serverless-operator/version -coverprofile cover.out
        github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-serverless-operator/cmd          coverage: 0.0% of statements
        github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-serverless-operator/internal/controller/profiles/common/constants                coverage: 0.0% of statements
        github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-serverless-operator/internal/controller/clusterplatform          coverage: 0.0% of statements
        github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-serverless-operator/internal/controller/knative          coverage: 0.0% of statements
        github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-serverless-operator/internal/controller/openshift                coverage: 0.0% of statements
?       github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-serverless-operator/internal/controller/profiles/common/variables        [no test files]
        github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-serverless-operator/internal/controller/profiles/factory         coverage: 0.0% of statements
ok      github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-serverless-operator/internal/controller  3.878s  coverage: 44.1% of statements
ok      github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-serverless-operator/internal/controller/builder  1.437s  coverage: 34.9% of statements
ok      github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-serverless-operator/internal/controller/cfg      3.947s  coverage: 50.0% of statements
ok      github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-serverless-operator/internal/controller/discovery        2.529s  coverage: 74.1% of statements
?       github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-serverless-operator/log  [no test files]
        github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-serverless-operator/internal/controller/workflows                coverage: 0.0% of statements
        github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-serverless-operator/test         coverage: 0.0% of statements
        github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-serverless-operator/utils/resources              coverage: 0.0% of statements
        github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-serverless-operator/version              coverage: 0.0% of statements
ok      github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-serverless-operator/internal/controller/platform 6.859s  coverage: 5.0% of statements
ok      github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-serverless-operator/internal/controller/platform/services        5.003s  coverage: 39.6% of statements
ok      github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-serverless-operator/internal/controller/profiles 5.922s  coverage: 20.6% of statements
ok      github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-serverless-operator/internal/controller/profiles/common  7.762s  coverage: 19.5% of statements
ok      github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-serverless-operator/internal/controller/profiles/common/persistence      6.642s  coverage: 37.7% of statements
ok      github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-serverless-operator/internal/controller/profiles/common/properties       7.096s  coverage: 45.8% of statements
ok      github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-serverless-operator/internal/controller/profiles/dev     7.839s  coverage: 58.0% of statements
ok      github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-serverless-operator/internal/controller/profiles/gitops  6.500s  coverage: 20.8% of statements
ok      github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-serverless-operator/internal/controller/profiles/preview 7.993s  coverage: 45.7% of statements
ok      github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-serverless-operator/internal/controller/workflowdef      7.046s  coverage: 23.3% of statements
ok      github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-serverless-operator/utils        7.208s  coverage: 11.5% of statements
ok      github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-serverless-operator/utils/kubernetes     7.508s  coverage: 15.9% of statements
ok      github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-serverless-operator/utils/openshift      7.894s  coverage: 40.0% of statements

ricardozanini · 2024-06-20T18:05:08Z

controllers/profiles/common/object_creators.go

@@ -76,6 +76,7 @@ const (
 // It serves as a basis for a basic Quarkus Java application, expected to listen on http 8080.
 func DeploymentCreator(workflow *operatorapi.SonataFlow, plf *operatorapi.SonataFlowPlatform) (client.Object, error) {
 	lbl := workflowproj.GetMergedLabels(workflow)
+	delete(lbl, workflowproj.LabelK8SPartOF)


Instead, can we have a GetLabelsForSelectors() and remove the items we don't want or create a new map for the items we want (preferred).

Then we use it only on the selectors field. Having the default merged labels in the objects is ok.

I'll do that and in addition I think it is the best to also use the platform object we have there and not use the platform from the status of the workflow because it is not there - hence the errors in the controller log while trying to update the deployment selector
wdyt?

controllers/profiles/gitops/profile_gitops_test.go

rgolangh · 2024-06-26T15:34:24Z

Repeating a discussion we had on slack:
Since the selector labels are immutable we would constantly fail to reconcile existing deployments.
This means that existing deployments would fall out of the network policies based on the labels set here.

ricardozanini · 2024-06-26T15:38:44Z

ok, just to add then we will remove from reconciliation the labels from the selector. Labels from other objects won't be replaced by the object management but MERGED instead. This way we avoid this kind of problem when migrating from different versions.

rgolangh · 2024-06-26T16:10:03Z

ok, just to add then we will remove from reconciliation the labels from the selector. Labels from other objects won't be replaced by the object management but MERGED instead. This way we avoid this kind of problem when migrating from different versions.

Ack this is probably the way to go. I'll make sure to adapt the code the add to the map and not replace.

Motivation: There's a need to select efficiently workflows and their respective services. Having the common kubernetes labels allow a single selector: podSelector: matchExpressions: - { key: app.kubernetes.io/component, operator: In, values: ["data-index-service", "jobs-service", "serverless-workflow"] } Modification: Make the v1.Deployment for services and the deployment or knative services to contain at common labels Result: A workflow deployment or knative serving labels: app.kubernetes.io/name: ${workflow name} app.kubernetes.io/component: serverless-workflow app.kubernetes.io/part-of: ${platform url set by status} app.kubernetes.io/managed-by: sonataflow-operator Data index or Jobs services Deployment.v1 labels: app.kubernetes.io/name: ${service name} app.kubernetes.io/component: data-index-service|jobs-service app.kubernetes.io/part-of: ${platform name} app.kubernetes.io/managed-by: sonataflow-operator Reference: https://kubernetes.io/docs/concepts/overview/working-with-objects/common-labels/#labels Signed-off-by: Roy Golan <[email protected]>

rgolangh · 2024-06-30T14:30:28Z

e2e test fixed and are green now.

one last note: installing sonata using an helm for example, would take over this label on all installed artifacts:

app.kubernetes.io/part-of: Helm

which ruins the nice query we thought about to get all the artifacts of a platform.

Fortunately according to helm documentation this label usage is optional and not mandatory.
https://helm.sh/docs/chart_best_practices/labels/

So I suggest we change our helm installation to avoid this label completely. However the most important labels for now are the app.kunernetes.io/component with the values of serverless-workflow, data-index-service, jobs-service

rgolangh · 2024-07-03T13:42:24Z

@wmedvede can you have a look?

wmedvede · 2024-07-19T13:40:51Z

Hi @rgolangh , great work, many thanks.

Here goes some nitpicks I could find doing piece of testing.

Pod for a WF deployed with preview profile

Pod for a WF deployed with the dev profile

^ I couldn't check the gitops profile, please verify.

Config maps for DI and JS

This is the config map for a workflow

Managed properties config map

Workflow deployed with the dev profile, both config maps was created by the operator:

But the managed properties for same WF, no labels.

When we create a WF with the dev profile, a route is created for it

Labels for builds
When a WF is created in Openshift with the preview mode, the following objects are created.

wmedvede

Code looks good, many thanks.
I have left some testing nitpicks.

rgolangh · 2024-07-22T10:45:12Z

to summarize the artifacts the operator creates directly or indirectly with no lables:

the build pod
route in dev prof without part-of
managedProps
pod in dev prof without part-of

wmedvede · 2024-07-24T07:31:29Z

to summarize the artifacts the operator creates directly or indirectly with no lables:

the build pod

route in dev prof without part-of

managedProps

pod in dev prof without part-of

Yes.
Then, one thing that will look weird is to have the managed props, created by the operator, labeled, and the "standard" props (user provided) not labeled. Also, regarding the "standard" props, we have two situations.

the user never provided the "standard" props. In that case, the operator still creates an empty one, this is good for consistency. In this case, the operator can label them.
the user has provided the "standard" props. Here, the operator should label them?
From the user perspective might look weird to see the config map he provided to gain some labels automatically after some time 🤔 , but on the other hand, for consistence we must label them.

rgolangh · 2024-07-24T19:09:17Z

I think it would be excellent to label the props the user provided, because that really binds a workflow and its dependencies nicely together.

wmedvede · 2024-07-25T13:35:20Z

@ricardozanini

I'm approving and merging this with the gaps stated in the screenshots above to not block another feature that is being developed by @rgolangh on top of this labels.

@rgolangh Would you mind open an issue to keep track of the gaps that are going be left so this can be tackled at some point.

rgolangh · 2024-07-25T13:52:09Z

@wmedvede created #509

rgolangh · 2024-07-25T13:53:48Z

I created #508 to add tests to cover workflowproj/operator.go

Motivation: There's a need to select efficiently workflows and their respective services. Having the common kubernetes labels allow a single selector: podSelector: matchExpressions: - { key: app.kubernetes.io/component, operator: In, values: ["data-index-service", "jobs-service", "serverless-workflow"] } Modification: Make the v1.Deployment for services and the deployment or knative services to contain at common labels Result: A workflow deployment or knative serving labels: app.kubernetes.io/name: ${workflow name} app.kubernetes.io/component: serverless-workflow app.kubernetes.io/part-of: ${platform url set by status} app.kubernetes.io/managed-by: sonataflow-operator Data index or Jobs services Deployment.v1 labels: app.kubernetes.io/name: ${service name} app.kubernetes.io/component: data-index-service|jobs-service app.kubernetes.io/part-of: ${platform name} app.kubernetes.io/managed-by: sonataflow-operator Reference: https://kubernetes.io/docs/concepts/overview/working-with-objects/common-labels/#labels Signed-off-by: Roy Golan <[email protected]>

rgolangh requested a review from ricardozanini as a code owner June 6, 2024 19:02

ricardozanini requested review from wmedvede, domhanak and jakubschwan June 6, 2024 19:24

ricardozanini reviewed Jun 6, 2024

View reviewed changes

controllers/platform/k8s.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

workflowproj/operator.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

wmedvede requested changes Jun 7, 2024

View reviewed changes

rgolangh force-pushed the common-labels branch from c94ddb8 to 2f87409 Compare June 7, 2024 14:21

rgolangh changed the title ~~Set recommended kubernetes labels on services and workflows~~ WIP: Set recommended kubernetes labels on services and workflows Jun 7, 2024

ricardozanini reviewed Jun 10, 2024

View reviewed changes

controllers/profiles/common/ensurer.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

This was referenced Jun 10, 2024

Add a SonataFlowPlatform reference to the SonataFlow status #484

Closed

Fix #484 - 🔗 Add platform reference to workflow status condition #485

Merged

rgolangh mentioned this pull request Jun 17, 2024

Add a network policy to allow backstage-sonata traffic parodos-dev/orchestrator-helm-chart#199

Merged

rgolangh force-pushed the common-labels branch from 2f87409 to 7a62159 Compare June 18, 2024 16:07

rgolangh force-pushed the common-labels branch from 7a62159 to 9979aca Compare June 19, 2024 16:20

rgolangh changed the title ~~WIP: Set recommended kubernetes labels on services and workflows~~ Set recommended kubernetes labels on services and workflows Jun 19, 2024

rgolangh force-pushed the common-labels branch from 9979aca to 3318816 Compare June 20, 2024 13:26

ricardozanini reviewed Jun 20, 2024

View reviewed changes

controllers/platform/k8s.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

rgolangh force-pushed the common-labels branch 3 times, most recently from 4140cb5 to f362560 Compare June 25, 2024 13:29

ricardozanini reviewed Jun 25, 2024

View reviewed changes

rgolangh force-pushed the common-labels branch 2 times, most recently from ea018f5 to d416bfc Compare June 25, 2024 15:18

rgolangh force-pushed the common-labels branch 2 times, most recently from 4e32dc3 to 373388c Compare June 30, 2024 11:13

rgolangh force-pushed the common-labels branch from 373388c to 8925294 Compare June 30, 2024 12:04

rgolangh requested a review from wmedvede July 15, 2024 10:29

wmedvede requested changes Jul 19, 2024

View reviewed changes

wmedvede approved these changes Jul 25, 2024

View reviewed changes

wmedvede merged commit a6a954a into apache:main Jul 25, 2024
4 checks passed

ricardozanini mentioned this pull request Sep 27, 2024

Some lables are missing on some of the resources the operator creates #509

Closed

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Set recommended kubernetes labels on services and workflows #482

Set recommended kubernetes labels on services and workflows #482

rgolangh commented Jun 6, 2024 •

edited

Loading

ricardozanini commented Jun 6, 2024

rgolangh commented Jun 7, 2024 via email

wmedvede left a comment

rgolangh commented Jun 7, 2024

ricardozanini commented Jun 7, 2024

rgolangh commented Jun 7, 2024

ricardozanini left a comment

ricardozanini commented Jun 11, 2024 •

edited

Loading

ricardozanini commented Jun 17, 2024

rgolangh commented Jun 18, 2024

ricardozanini commented Jun 19, 2024

ricardozanini commented Jun 20, 2024

rgolangh commented Jun 20, 2024 via email

ricardozanini commented Jun 20, 2024

rgolangh commented Jun 20, 2024

ricardozanini commented Jun 20, 2024

ricardozanini commented Jun 20, 2024

ricardozanini Jun 20, 2024

rgolangh Jun 25, 2024

rgolangh commented Jun 26, 2024

ricardozanini commented Jun 26, 2024

rgolangh commented Jun 26, 2024

rgolangh commented Jun 30, 2024 •

edited

Loading

rgolangh commented Jul 3, 2024

wmedvede commented Jul 19, 2024

wmedvede left a comment

rgolangh commented Jul 22, 2024 •

edited

Loading

wmedvede commented Jul 24, 2024 •

edited

Loading

rgolangh commented Jul 24, 2024

wmedvede commented Jul 25, 2024

rgolangh commented Jul 25, 2024

rgolangh commented Jul 25, 2024 •

edited

Loading

Set recommended kubernetes labels on services and workflows #482

Set recommended kubernetes labels on services and workflows #482

Conversation

rgolangh commented Jun 6, 2024 • edited Loading

Motivation

ricardozanini commented Jun 6, 2024

rgolangh commented Jun 7, 2024 via email

wmedvede left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

rgolangh commented Jun 7, 2024

ricardozanini commented Jun 7, 2024

rgolangh commented Jun 7, 2024

ricardozanini left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

ricardozanini commented Jun 11, 2024 • edited Loading

ricardozanini commented Jun 17, 2024

rgolangh commented Jun 18, 2024

ricardozanini commented Jun 19, 2024

ricardozanini commented Jun 20, 2024

rgolangh commented Jun 20, 2024 via email

ricardozanini commented Jun 20, 2024

rgolangh commented Jun 20, 2024

ricardozanini commented Jun 20, 2024

ricardozanini commented Jun 20, 2024

ricardozanini Jun 20, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

rgolangh Jun 25, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

rgolangh commented Jun 26, 2024

ricardozanini commented Jun 26, 2024

rgolangh commented Jun 26, 2024

rgolangh commented Jun 30, 2024 • edited Loading

rgolangh commented Jul 3, 2024

wmedvede commented Jul 19, 2024

wmedvede left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

rgolangh commented Jul 22, 2024 • edited Loading

wmedvede commented Jul 24, 2024 • edited Loading

rgolangh commented Jul 24, 2024

wmedvede commented Jul 25, 2024

rgolangh commented Jul 25, 2024

rgolangh commented Jul 25, 2024 • edited Loading

rgolangh commented Jun 6, 2024 •

edited

Loading

ricardozanini commented Jun 11, 2024 •

edited

Loading

rgolangh commented Jun 30, 2024 •

edited

Loading

rgolangh commented Jul 22, 2024 •

edited

Loading

wmedvede commented Jul 24, 2024 •

edited

Loading

rgolangh commented Jul 25, 2024 •

edited

Loading