Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[feature request]merge yurtctl init test command into yurtadm tool #1059

Closed
rambohe-ch opened this issue Nov 16, 2022 · 8 comments · Fixed by #1219
Closed

[feature request]merge yurtctl init test command into yurtadm tool #1059

rambohe-ch opened this issue Nov 16, 2022 · 8 comments · Fixed by #1219
Assignees
Labels
kind/feature kind/feature

Comments

@rambohe-ch
Copy link
Member

What would you like to be added:
yurtctl tool is only used by e2e tests, in order to make OpenYurt tools more clearly, it's a good idea to merge the features of yurtctl into yurtadm tool. and yurtctl tool will be removed from OpenYurt.

Why is this needed:
end user is recommended to use kubectl(K8s native tool) to interact with the OpenYurt cluster. and yurtadm tool will be used for OpenYurt like kubeadm for K8s.

others
/kind feature

@YTGhost
Copy link
Member

YTGhost commented Nov 16, 2022

Maybe I can do this after I completely finish yurtadm join refactoring

@rambohe-ch
Copy link
Member Author

Maybe I can do this after I completely finish yurtadm join refactoring

good job. /assign @YTGhost

@rambohe-ch
Copy link
Member Author

Maybe I can do this after I completely finish yurtadm join refactoring

good job.

/assign @YTGhost

@rambohe-ch
Copy link
Member Author

@YTGhost I think that yurtctl markautonomous and yurtctl cluster-info, these two commands are rarely used by end users, so just deprecated them. and merge yurtctl test init into yurtadm tool.

maybe we should consider a new name for yurtctl test init command in yurtadm.

@YTGhost
Copy link
Member

YTGhost commented Nov 29, 2022

@YTGhost I think that yurtctl markautonomous and yurtctl cluster-info, these two commands are rarely used by end users, so just deprecated them. and merge yurtctl test init into yurtadm tool.

maybe we should consider a new name for yurtctl test init command in yurtadm.

@rambohe-ch I think using yurtadm test instead of yurtctl test init is a good choice, what do you think?

@Congrool
Copy link
Member

As we disscussed, it's werid to have such test command in yurtadm. We can add the binary into test/e2e which has the ability of starting up an openyurt cluster with kind. For users, we can provide a make target like current make local-up-openyurt which will call this binary to start up the openyurt clusters, hence no influence will be imposed on users. For e2e test, we can still use the existing scripts run-e2e-test.sh, which may not be affected by this change.

@YTGhost @rambohe-ch what do you think?

@rambohe-ch
Copy link
Member Author

As we disscussed, it's werid to have such test command in yurtadm. We can add the binary into test/e2e which has the ability of starting up an openyurt cluster with kind. For users, we can provide a make target like current make local-up-openyurt which will call this binary to start up the openyurt clusters, hence no influence will be imposed on users. For e2e test, we can still use the existing scripts run-e2e-test.sh, which may not be affected by this change.

@YTGhost @rambohe-ch what do you think?

@Congrool Yes, i agree with you that combine yurtctl init test command into yurtadm is not suitable. and it's a good idea to integrate with e2e. agree +1

@YTGhost
Copy link
Member

YTGhost commented Nov 30, 2022

As we disscussed, it's werid to have such test command in yurtadm. We can add the binary into test/e2e which has the ability of starting up an openyurt cluster with kind. For users, we can provide a make target like current make local-up-openyurt which will call this binary to start up the openyurt clusters, hence no influence will be imposed on users. For e2e test, we can still use the existing scripts run-e2e-test.sh, which may not be affected by this change.

@YTGhost @rambohe-ch what do you think?

It's a good idea, agree + 1

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
kind/feature kind/feature
Projects
No open projects
Status: Done
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

3 participants