Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Aug 2, 2023. It is now read-only.

PipelineRuns are all in kabanero namespace #398

Closed
ianpartridge opened this issue Jun 5, 2020 · 3 comments
Closed

PipelineRuns are all in kabanero namespace #398

ianpartridge opened this issue Jun 5, 2020 · 3 comments

Comments

@ianpartridge
Copy link
Contributor

Currently, when the pipelines execute, it always occurs in the kabanero namespace (the PipelineRun CR exists in that namespace). This means that pipeline executions from all different workloads are jumbled together making it very difficult to distinguish between them.

A better approach would be for pipelines to run in the namespace that they are deploying into.

For example, if the user has added:

spec:
  targetNamespaces:
  - my-app

to their Kabanero CR, the pipeline could run in the my-app namespace. This would give the user ownership over their PipelineRun and make usage and investigation much clearer.

@ianpartridge
Copy link
Contributor Author

This does mean that the build would consume resources in the deployment namespace which is perhaps not ideal. We could look at other approaches, let's keep the issue for the root problem of the indistinguishability of PipelineRuns in the kabanero namespace.

@kaczyns
Copy link
Member

kaczyns commented Jun 6, 2020

We have been trying to introduce the concept of a pipeline namespace (a single one) that runs builds. It is not desirable to have the builds running in the control namespace (kabanero), nor do I think it's desirable to have them running in the app deploy namespaces, although I can see how that would be convenient on some levels.

Please have a look at kabanero-io/kabanero-operator#230 and let us know if this addresses some of your concerns.

@ianpartridge
Copy link
Contributor Author

Thanks @kaczyns - closing in favour of kabanero-io/kabanero-operator#230

Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants