cleanup to resource types #73

nader-ziada · 2018-09-27T14:37:15Z

Proposed Changes

rename StandardResource to PipelineResource
rename ResourceSuper to PipelineResourceInterface
make interface func public
change to PipelineResourceSpec to not be an array
update examples and samples to reflect resource design

nader-ziada · 2018-09-27T14:37:47Z

bobcatfish

I did an initial quick pass, mostly wondering if some of the references are not quite sync-ed up properly (it's super hard to keep in sync since there is literally no way to test!!).

I like the new names!

bobcatfish · 2018-09-27T18:50:15Z

examples/build_task.yaml

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-apiVersion: pipeline.knative.dev/v1beta1
+apiVersion: pipeline.knative.dev/v1alpha1


whoops, can't believe how easy it is to miss these! Thanks for catching it :D

bobcatfish · 2018-09-27T18:51:42Z

pkg/apis/pipeline/v1alpha1/resource_types.go

+
+	// PipelineResourceTypeImage indicates that this source is a docker Image.
+	PipelineResourceTypeImage PipelineResourceType = "image"
+)


bobcatfish · 2018-09-27T18:54:04Z

samples/pipeline_v1alpha1_pipeline.yaml

@@ -5,48 +5,57 @@ metadata:
  namespace: default
 spec:
    tasks:


thanks for updating this! sorry for the extra confusion of having two sets of having two sets of examples 🤞 #20 🤞

bobcatfish · 2018-09-27T18:56:09Z

samples/pipeline_v1alpha1_task.yaml

+        resources:
+         - resourceRef:
+             name: registry
+           name: builtImage # registy is the name of the ArtifactStore


i think this comment is no longer relevant

will remove it

bobcatfish · 2018-09-27T18:58:43Z

examples/pipelines/guestbook-resources.yaml

+  namespace: default
+spec:        
+    name: stagingRegistry


a bunch of the image resources have names like registry or stagingRegistry, which I find a bit confusing b/c the info here is about a particular image in a registry, not just a registry (correct me if I'm wrong!)

could we give them names that reflect that they are images?
also i've been assuming that the name field here is name of the image, and that the url below would be the url to the registry, so that one could use them separately (or maybe we should change url to registryUrl?)

correct assumption, name is for the image and url is for the registry, i'll update the name and you can decide after if you want to the url to registryUrl, but I think its implied

bobcatfish · 2018-09-27T19:02:33Z

examples/pipelines/guestbook-resources.yaml

+      value: githubServiceAccount
+---      
+apiVersion: pipeline.knative.dev/v1alpha1
+kind: Resource


interesting! so one would need to reference each Resource separately?

I am fine with doing this but I assumed differently in the examples I wrote out, e.g. in #64 I assumed you could declare one Resource type which contained a list of all the resources you needed for your Pipeline. One thing I like about that is that it means the number of yaml files a person would need to interact with their Pipeline is limited.

But if it makes more sense to have a separate object for each Resource we can update the issues!

I made this change as part of this PR actually, its because when I started working on the git resource I found that having an array in the Spec that refers to another object makes the code too awkward

okay sounds good!

bobcatfish · 2018-09-27T19:03:25Z

examples/pipelines/kritis-resources.yaml

+  namespace: default
+spec:  
+  name: stagingRegistry-resource


do we need both the name in the spec and the name in the metadata?

not sure if we need both?

bobcatfish · 2018-09-27T19:03:57Z

examples/pipelines/kritis-resources.yaml

+kind: Resource
+metadata:
+  name: kritis-resources-image


some of the resources in these examples I don't see referenced anywhere, maybe the references in the Pipelines need to be updated?

I'll check them again, might have missed it

nader-ziada · 2018-09-27T19:33:34Z

@bobcatfish addressed comments

bobcatfish · 2018-09-28T17:25:29Z

examples/pipelines/guestbook.yaml

-              - name: registry
-                key: stagingRegistry
+              - name: redisImage
+                key: stagingImage


i think something is a bit odd here, so this seems to be saying:

The Task build-push has an output called redisImage

For that output, use the Resource called stagingImage

Looking at the Task:

It looks like the image is actually called builtImage, so I think this section should be:

outputSourceBindings: - name: builtImage key: stagingImage

bobcatfish · 2018-09-28T17:34:13Z

samples/pipeline_v1alpha1_task.yaml

+        resources:
+         - resourceRef:
+             name: registry
+           name: builtImage 


I'm confused why we need a resourceRef here and what it would be referencing

We're hooking up all the refs in the Pipeline, and the Task doesn't know what Resource it will be running against until it is supplied.

Can you explain more about why this is needed here? (maybe it isn't?)

bobcatfish · 2018-09-28T17:35:16Z

samples/pipeline_v1alpha1_taskrun.yaml

-              storeKey: registry # registy is the name of the ArtifactStore
+          - name: builtImage
+            type: image
+            storeKey: registry # registy is the name of the ArtifactStore


i think this storeKey is out of date - in fact i think what we want here is just a reference to the Resource that we actually used

- rename `StandardResource` to `PipelineResource` - rename `ResourceSuper` to `PipelineResourceInterface` and make func public - change to PipelineResourceSpec to not be an array

remove resources from pipeline main yaml add resourceRef to source binding remove unused name from ResourceSpec update examples

nader-ziada · 2018-09-28T20:55:51Z

@bobcatfish addressed the comments, please take a look, I might have missed something

bobcatfish

Pretty much the only thing left is that I think the resources in Tasks should have a type as well, but I'm happy to merge this as-is and keep iterating!

/approve
/lgtm
/hold

(Feel free to remove /hold and merge as is!)

bobcatfish · 2018-09-28T22:43:39Z

examples/deploy_tasks.yaml

-            - resourceRef:
-                name: resource-name
-              name: workspace
+              - name: workspace


i think this should have a type as well, in this case git or github, so that a person using the Task knows what kind of resource to provide

will add type, makes sense for clarity

bobcatfish · 2018-09-28T22:45:36Z

examples/pipelines/guestbook-resources.yaml

-        value: github.com/kubernetes/examples
-      - name: revision
-        value: HEAD      
+        value: github.com/GoogleCloudPlatform/redis-docker/blob/master/4/debian9/4.0/Dockerfile


hmm, do you think folks would often have git resources that point at just one file, or would they be more likely to specify the whole repo?

I'm guessing that even if the goal here was to use this Dockerfile, the Task would need other files in the repo as well, so maybe this would be something like value: github.com/GoogleCloudPlatform/redis-docker and the Taskwould also need a param with the path to the Dockerfile,/4/debian9/4.0/Dockerfile`?

yes, you are correct, the url should not include the path to the file

bobcatfish · 2018-09-28T22:45:47Z

examples/pipelines/guestbook.yaml

+              - name: guestbookImage 
+                key: builtImage # bind to the name in the task
+                resourceRef:
+                  name: guestbookstagingimage


cool, looking good!

knative-prow-robot · 2018-09-28T22:47:42Z

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: bobcatfish, pivotal-nader-ziada

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

~~OWNERS~~ [bobcatfish]

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

nader-ziada · 2018-09-29T02:51:40Z

@bobcatfish made the final changes

/hold cancel

nader-ziada · 2018-09-29T02:52:11Z

@bobcatfish you will have to lgtm again

bobcatfish · 2018-10-01T17:08:23Z

/lgtm

bobcatfish · 2018-10-01T17:31:17Z

/lgtm

* cleanup to resource types - rename `StandardResource` to `PipelineResource` - rename `ResourceSuper` to `PipelineResourceInterface` and make func public - change to PipelineResourceSpec to not be an array * update example yaml with better resource names * updates to resources design remove resources from pipeline main yaml add resourceRef to source binding remove unused name from ResourceSpec update examples * add type field to resource in task

knative-prow-robot added the size/XXL Denotes a PR that changes 1000+ lines, ignoring generated files. label Sep 27, 2018

knative-prow-robot requested review from dlorenc and imjasonh September 27, 2018 14:37

knative-prow-robot assigned bobcatfish Sep 27, 2018

nader-ziada force-pushed the resource-followup branch from f035925 to 6cfda11 Compare September 27, 2018 15:53

bobcatfish reviewed Sep 27, 2018

View reviewed changes

bobcatfish reviewed Sep 28, 2018

View reviewed changes

nader-ziada added 3 commits September 28, 2018 15:25

cleanup to resource types

213e26f

- rename `StandardResource` to `PipelineResource` - rename `ResourceSuper` to `PipelineResourceInterface` and make func public - change to PipelineResourceSpec to not be an array

update example yaml with better resource names

81b7b71

updates to resources design

2145e1e

remove resources from pipeline main yaml add resourceRef to source binding remove unused name from ResourceSpec update examples

nader-ziada force-pushed the resource-followup branch from b499a94 to 2145e1e Compare September 28, 2018 20:55

bobcatfish reviewed Sep 28, 2018

View reviewed changes

knative-prow-robot added lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. labels Sep 28, 2018

knative-prow-robot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Sep 28, 2018

add type field to resource in task

99d5fb6

knative-prow-robot removed the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Sep 29, 2018

knative-prow-robot removed the do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. label Sep 29, 2018

vdemeester approved these changes Oct 1, 2018

View reviewed changes

knative-prow-robot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Oct 1, 2018

Merge branch 'master' into resource-followup

d4059d6

knative-prow-robot removed the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Oct 1, 2018

knative-prow-robot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Oct 1, 2018

knative-prow-robot merged commit cf97674 into tektoncd:master Oct 1, 2018

nader-ziada deleted the resource-followup branch October 11, 2018 20:27

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

cleanup to resource types #73

cleanup to resource types #73

nader-ziada commented Sep 27, 2018

nader-ziada commented Sep 27, 2018

bobcatfish left a comment

bobcatfish Sep 27, 2018

bobcatfish Sep 27, 2018

bobcatfish Sep 27, 2018

bobcatfish Sep 27, 2018

nader-ziada Sep 27, 2018

bobcatfish Sep 27, 2018

nader-ziada Sep 27, 2018

bobcatfish Sep 27, 2018

nader-ziada Sep 27, 2018

bobcatfish Sep 28, 2018

bobcatfish Sep 27, 2018

nader-ziada Sep 27, 2018

bobcatfish Sep 27, 2018

nader-ziada Sep 27, 2018

nader-ziada commented Sep 27, 2018

bobcatfish Sep 28, 2018

bobcatfish Sep 28, 2018

bobcatfish Sep 28, 2018

nader-ziada commented Sep 28, 2018

bobcatfish left a comment

bobcatfish Sep 28, 2018

nader-ziada Sep 29, 2018

bobcatfish Sep 28, 2018

nader-ziada Sep 29, 2018

bobcatfish Sep 28, 2018

knative-prow-robot commented Sep 28, 2018

nader-ziada commented Sep 29, 2018

nader-ziada commented Sep 29, 2018

bobcatfish commented Oct 1, 2018

bobcatfish commented Oct 1, 2018

		@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
		apiVersion: pipeline.knative.dev/v1beta1
		apiVersion: pipeline.knative.dev/v1alpha1

cleanup to resource types #73

cleanup to resource types #73

Conversation

nader-ziada commented Sep 27, 2018

Proposed Changes

nader-ziada commented Sep 27, 2018

bobcatfish left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

nader-ziada commented Sep 27, 2018

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

nader-ziada commented Sep 28, 2018

bobcatfish left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

knative-prow-robot commented Sep 28, 2018

nader-ziada commented Sep 29, 2018

nader-ziada commented Sep 29, 2018

bobcatfish commented Oct 1, 2018

bobcatfish commented Oct 1, 2018