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

Default to in-cluster config and remove kube config requirements #105

Conversation

chrisdoherty4
Copy link
Member

The Kubernetes configuration currently required via the CLI isn't strictly required. If we aren't in-cluster and nothing was supplied it will naturally fail on loading. This change removes the checks entirely and lets the client creation process error out naturally.

@chrisdoherty4 chrisdoherty4 force-pushed the feature/remove-kube-config-requirements-and-defualt-to-incluster branch from 5520d6e to dc9a812 Compare May 12, 2022 18:07
@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented May 12, 2022

Codecov Report

Merging #105 (c67879c) into main (27db950) will decrease coverage by 2.51%.
The diff coverage is 0.00%.

❗ Current head c67879c differs from pull request most recent head dc9a812. Consider uploading reports for the commit dc9a812 to get more accurate results

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #105      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   42.68%   40.17%   -2.52%     
==========================================
  Files           8        8              
  Lines         581      575       -6     
==========================================
- Hits          248      231      -17     
- Misses        302      311       +9     
- Partials       31       33       +2     
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
hardware/client.go 0.00% <ø> (ø)
hardware/kubernetes.go 47.52% <0.00%> (+1.37%) ⬆️
grpc/server.go 43.67% <0.00%> (-10.76%) ⬇️

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 27db950...dc9a812. Read the comment docs.

Copy link
Contributor

@micahhausler micahhausler left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

@jacobweinstock jacobweinstock added the ready-to-merge Signal to Mergify to merge the PR. label May 12, 2022
@mergify mergify bot merged commit 7b286fd into tinkerbell:main May 12, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
ready-to-merge Signal to Mergify to merge the PR.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants