Enable to ignore manifests' fields from kubernetes' drift detection #4249
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
|
No GitHub releases will be created one this pull request got merged. Because the following tags were already created before.
|
funera1
force-pushed
the
drift-detection-ignore-field
branch
from
13b21b8
to
0438ee3
Compare
funera1
changed the title
knanao
reviewed
Mar 6, 2023
OK. I'll try it. |
funera1
force-pushed
the
drift-detection-ignore-field
branch
2 times, most recently
from
eaff072
to
8e1f4fd
Compare
funera1
force-pushed
the
drift-detection-ignore-field
branch
from
8e1f4fd
to
a603f37
Compare
Co-authored-by: knanao <[email protected]>
|
@knanao |
Merged
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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:
In the previous implementation, panic occurred when ddCfg was nil. So, this problem is solved.
Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
Fixes #4202 #4241
Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?: