Adopt pod checkpointer

[pires]

Refs #127

[luxas]

This task includes:

• moving the checkpointer from https://github.com/kubernetes-incubator/bootkube/blob/master/cmd/checkpoint/main.go (probably with commit history) to the kubeadm repo
• adding a license header to the files
• moving to client-go
• renaming the annotation used
• creating a Makefile that can build and push the binary for multiple architectures to gcr.io

[errordeveloper]

I am somewhat reluctant to moving the moving the code without making any use of it, what is the follow up accomplishment? If we are not so sure, may be we shouldn't do it until we are sure.

[luxas]

First, move the code to kubernetes/kubeadm, and once we have the Makefile as well, @mikedanese will push the Docker image with that checkpointer inside and then we'll deploy it when using selfhosting and kuebadm.

[pires]

Also @aaronlevy mentioned that when this move is done, bootkube would be changed to use the upstream (this!) solution.

[luxas]

Exactly! Both can take advantage of and experiment with it!

[aaronlevy]

What is the process for getting images built? That would be my only concern moving bootkube over (e.g. needing a fix but not being able to get an image built). But I don't want to have to manage changes between the code in two places - so ideally can move over to a single source of truth quickly.

[luxas]

That can be a bottleneck frankly, since Googlers only have push access to gcr.io
But maybe @mikedanese can promise to push images quickly if there have been changes committed ;)

[luxas]

@timothysc is working on implementing this; it's tracked in a features issue as well: kubernetes/enhancements#378

[luxas]

@timothysc I'm moving this to v1.9

[luxas]

@timothysc we need to annotate the control plane manifests with the magic annotation if the self-hosting feature gate is set now, right?

[timothysc]

yes, add node.kubernetes.io/bootstrap-checkpoint=true

[timothysc]

complete details are here - https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/1241/files

[jberkus]

This issue is listed as being in 1.9, can we have a status? It appears that there hasn't been any work on it in a while.

[luxas]

Moved to v1.10 as discussed in the SIG

[timothysc]

@errordeveloper was going to re-look into the secrets issues and the multiple approaches.

[timothysc]

Closing, I have cleaner plans.