-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.2k
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
Allow using the same base with multiple overlays or transformations #38
Comments
@monopole I would love to get your thoughts on this? |
I'm not sure if this is about namespaces or about a desire to wrap two overlays with a third |
I want two deployments with the same name and the same namespace with different prefixes. But the check happens before the prefix transform runs. but two deployments with the same name in different namespaces would be a similar issue. |
Please state the desired end result in yaml :) |
Or lets just wait till your #54 is in. The application_test in that PR should define a starting point for further behavior improvements. |
It would look like
|
another example of needing to use the same base multiple times would be #126 if I wanted to create multiple cronjobs I would get the same error
|
SOLUTION1You want to be able to deploy multiple deployment objects, say |
@sethpollack I propose a different approach instead of using the same base with multiple overlays. We can have some notion to let kustomize know that it deals with multiple kustomizations instead of only one. Then for each of them, process it as usual. Then we avoid this problem.
|
That would work. |
@sethpollack would like to hear your feedback about SOLUTION1 that @Liujingfang1 suggested above. |
@droot The goal for me would be to have a single kustomization file that represents my entire cluster.
|
#204 should have fixed this problem. |
Here is an example https://github.com/sethpollack/kustomize_example
When you run
kustomize build cluster_a
You get the following error:
Is that the desired result? Or should they be treated as unique based on the
namePrefix
that they use?The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: