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
We currently define the roles for different applications statically, where if we add an application we create new roles in this operator. This is irrespective of whether someone has actually deployed this application. We should change this to instead be dynamic and tailored to what has been deployed.
A concept for this could be through this charm providing a user-role relation (or something with a better name :) ). Applications could relate to this relation and provide ClusterRoles like these that define everything that should be included. This operator could then be in charge of maintaining those roles. This way if a Seldon is deployed and kfp is not, roles only exist for Seldon. And if a new Seldon release adds a new CRD, it is managed in what the Seldon charm provides to the user-role relation, rather than here.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
We currently define the roles for different applications statically, where if we add an application we create new roles in this operator. This is irrespective of whether someone has actually deployed this application. We should change this to instead be dynamic and tailored to what has been deployed.
A concept for this could be through this charm providing a
user-role
relation (or something with a better name :) ). Applications could relate to this relation and provideClusterRole
s like these that define everything that should be included. This operator could then be in charge of maintaining those roles. This way if a Seldon is deployed and kfp is not, roles only exist for Seldon. And if a new Seldon release adds a new CRD, it is managed in what the Seldon charm provides to theuser-role
relation, rather than here.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: