Use EKS-like status #877
Merged
Use EKS-like status #877
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
mflendrich
previously approved these changes
Sep 29, 2020
|
LGTM |
Co-authored-by: Michał Flendrich <[email protected]>
hbagdi
approved these changes
Sep 29, 2020
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What this PR does / why we need it:
Updates EKS deployment guide to make it more EKS-like
Which issue this PR fixes (optional, in
fixes #<issue number>(, fixes #<issue_number>, ...)format, will close that issue when PR gets merged): fixes #493Special notes for your reviewer:
The
PROXY_IPname is now a misnomer, but shouldn't matter in practice as it'll resolve under the hood. Left as-is since we use that same variable name elsewhere and changing it would probably do more harm than good.Github doesn't appear to want to let me add non-org member reviewers of my choice, but @harshal-shah does this look good to you? I don't have an EKS cluster ready to check myself, so this is a combination of the suggested change from the issue and a status that looks more or less like examples I can find in AWS docs.