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

Add namingStrategy for InfrastructureCluster #11671

Open
simonostendorf opened this issue Jan 11, 2025 · 3 comments
Open

Add namingStrategy for InfrastructureCluster #11671

simonostendorf opened this issue Jan 11, 2025 · 3 comments
Labels
area/clusterclass Issues or PRs related to clusterclass kind/feature Categorizes issue or PR as related to a new feature. needs-priority Indicates an issue lacks a `priority/foo` label and requires one. needs-triage Indicates an issue or PR lacks a `triage/foo` label and requires one.

Comments

@simonostendorf
Copy link

What would you like to be added (User Story)?

As a cluster administrator I want to control how my InfrastructureClusters are named so that they match my other cluster-api components.

Detailed Description

When using cluster-classes the user can change the naming scheme of the resulting control-plane and the machine-deployment / machine-pool objects but not for the infrastructure cluster.

I think it would be nice to support a namingStrategy for infrastructure as well. This would allow me to remove the random id at the end because my cluster names are already random ids.

Anything else you would like to add?

No response

Label(s) to be applied

/kind feature

/area cluster-class

@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

@simonostendorf: The label(s) area/cluster-class cannot be applied, because the repository doesn't have them.

In response to this:

What would you like to be added (User Story)?

As a cluster administrator I want to control how my InfrastructureClusters are named so that they match my other cluster-api components.

Detailed Description

When using cluster-classes the user can change the naming scheme of the resulting control-plane and the machine-deployment / machine-pool objects but not for the infrastructure cluster.

I think it would be nice to support a namingStrategy for infrastructure as well. This would allow me to remove the random id at the end because my cluster names are already random ids.

Anything else you would like to add?

No response

Label(s) to be applied

/kind feature

/area cluster-class

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository.

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added kind/feature Categorizes issue or PR as related to a new feature. needs-priority Indicates an issue lacks a `priority/foo` label and requires one. needs-triage Indicates an issue or PR lacks a `triage/foo` label and requires one. labels Jan 11, 2025
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

This issue is currently awaiting triage.

If CAPI contributors determine this is a relevant issue, they will accept it by applying the triage/accepted label and provide further guidance.

The triage/accepted label can be added by org members by writing /triage accepted in a comment.

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository.

@simonostendorf
Copy link
Author

/area clusterclass

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the area/clusterclass Issues or PRs related to clusterclass label Jan 11, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
area/clusterclass Issues or PRs related to clusterclass kind/feature Categorizes issue or PR as related to a new feature. needs-priority Indicates an issue lacks a `priority/foo` label and requires one. needs-triage Indicates an issue or PR lacks a `triage/foo` label and requires one.
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants