-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 367
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
✨ Add command for fetching permission claims #2203
✨ Add command for fetching permission claims #2203
Conversation
c6b873a
to
6f4b6ab
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Do we have some example output?
out := printers.GetNewTabWriter(g.Out) | ||
defer out.Flush() | ||
|
||
err = printHeaders(out) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Will we support an -o json
or --quiet
? Can I pipe the output of this command into another command that accepts the claims?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Currently no. kubectl get
accepts K8s objects itself as args. For example, having the output schema of pod or deployment would add value. We don't have an independent custom resource named permission claims.
Instead edit
will reopen the entire APIBinding resource in an editor and allow users edit it. So there is no specific use case of piping the output to any other command directly and modifying the status of permission claim.
@stevekuznetsov a super basic sample output is in the PR description (github is screwing up the formatting). It is basically the output of whatever I am specifying in apibinding.spec.permisisonclaims
|
6f4b6ab
to
ba11861
Compare
Hi @varshaprasad96, how will it look like when name/namespace or selectors have been defined? Will they get added to the first column? What about verbs and subresources that may come later on? Will the verbs be in an additional column? It should not prevent this PR to get progressed but it may be interesting to have in mind what will come next. |
Yep - would love to have the leading column be the APIBinding name, and then have a column for group/version, and another for resource(s) |
ba11861
to
c8cc1b3
Compare
@fgiloux @stevekuznetsov Have modified the first column to be the |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
IIRC we're about to make resource:group not 1:1 in permission claims but when that happens they can fiddle with the columns here.
/lgtm |
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: stevekuznetsov The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. The pull request process is described here
Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
Summary
This PR adds command to get permission claims related to an APIBinding.
Example:
Related design doc: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1J31wXY1-2aCyyGFjUlusKoHDzV-zktAmRdIMjMf4OR0/edit