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 annotation to skip resources #160

Open
danibaeyens opened this issue Feb 12, 2021 · 3 comments
Open

Add annotation to skip resources #160

danibaeyens opened this issue Feb 12, 2021 · 3 comments
Labels
enhancement New feature or request question Further information is requested

Comments

@danibaeyens
Copy link
Contributor




Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
We have a use case where we own a set of multi-tenant clusters, being a central team. Clusters have different namespaces owned by different teams.

Central team may want to get a general overview report of the cluster status. Each tenant team can run themselves their popeye report to check their own status and fix their namespace.

Still, central team wants to provide the ability to tenant teams to annotate a certain resource, so checks are skipped for it on both runs:

  • Popeye runs from the tenant team (as they know why they want to skip it), so their score is not impacted by that resource
  • Also the central team runs, as they can calculate the same score as the tenant team wants, without active communication between both.

Describe the solution you'd like
Specific resources (any) could be annotated with an annotation like:
popeyecli.io/skip-checks: "true"
which will raise an info message stating "Resource xx/yyyy has been skipped"

Describe alternatives you've considered
A clear alternative could be that the central teams have a public config file and the tenant team can trigger a PR with a change on the excludes section, but still, I prefer the annotation as an info is also notifying the central team the resources that are proactively ignored.

Additional context

@marians
Copy link
Contributor

marians commented Feb 15, 2021

I like the suggestion. One thing to think about is a way to make the annotation more expressive (than just binary true/false), e. g. to disable certain checks, but not others.

@derailed
Copy link
Owner

derailed commented Feb 2, 2024

@marians @danibaeyens Thank you both for piping in. I like the concept but I think it would be tough to convey variations or be as expressive as a spinach config. Another issue to consider here is what if you want to run popeye wide open?

@derailed derailed added the question Further information is requested label Feb 2, 2024
@danibaeyens
Copy link
Contributor Author

@derailed the reason for this issue was the explanation here: #144 (comment)
Worst case, I might recommend teams to use the grafana dashboard to pick and choose their score depending on the rules they want to watch.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request question Further information is requested
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants