Tidy RuntimeClass page for v1.18 #19578
Conversation
|
@sftim: You must be a member of the kubernetes/website-milestone-maintainers GitHub team to set the milestone. If you believe you should be able to issue the /milestone command, please contact your Website milestone maintainers and have them propose you as an additional delegate for this responsibility. In response to this:
Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository. |
k8s-ci-robot
added
kind/cleanup
|
Deploy preview for kubernetes-io-vnext-staging processing. Building with commit 3c0d9d3 https://app.netlify.com/sites/kubernetes-io-vnext-staging/deploys/5e67b15965c42a000aa0fde5 |
k8s-ci-robot
added
the
size/M
k8s-ci-robot
added
language/en
sftim
force-pushed
the
20200310_tidy_runtime_class
branch
from
deb40e3 to
cb26f48
Compare
| 2. Create the corresponding RuntimeClass resources | ||
|
|
||
| #### 1. Configure the CRI implementation on nodes | ||
| ### 1. Configure the CRI implementation on nodes |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
nit: Are lines 42-43 needed?
| {{< /note >}} | ||
| ### Usage | ||
| ## Usage |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Line 115, 127: Check the spacing around the tooltip (heading). Should a tooltip appear in a heading?
#### {{< glossary_tooltip term_id="containerd" >}}
#### {{< glossary_tooltip term_id="cri-o" >}}
|
@kbhawkey the cleanup in this PR is focused on changes relevant to Kubernetes releases. I can do more cleanup on the master branch after this releases. |
@sftim, I understand. Was there another 1.18 PR related to RuntimeClass that missed these changes? |
|
I'm doing this cleanup because the existing page talks about (what will be) past releases and I want to tidy this. There's no KEP or k/k change that this is directly linked to. |
@sftim , I think the change are fine. My only minor point is that the pull request is attached to the 1.18 release. The changes could be merged to the master branch now (feature is Beta since 1.14 according to feature gate page but this page marks the version 1.16)? Or, are you trying to tag these changes to this release just to mark the update with the new milestone? |
|
/lgtm |
k8s-ci-robot
added
the
lgtm
|
The details about upgrading to 1.14 aren't required once v1.18 is out because the oldest published docs will then be the 1.14 series. That's why I think this change should wait until the 1.18 release before it lands. |
|
/milestone 1.18 |
|
@sftim Is this PR still relevant? |
|
I'd like this to be in the release @VineethReddy02 but it's not a deal-breaker if it's missed out. |
|
@VineethReddy02, Is the |
|
@kbhawkey We can accept this if it is ready to merge state. ELse, I would request you to close the PR. As the release one day away i.e 24th March. |
|
/approve |
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: VineethReddy02 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:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
k8s-ci-robot
added
the
approved
6 participants
These changes fit with PR #19059 and are intended not to conflict with the changes from that other PR.
/kind cleanup
/milestone 1.18
@VineethReddy02, could you consider this for the release?