-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 3
Isolated container #51
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
Conversation
9a232c4 to
bc78562
Compare
|
I think we should directly go for isolated pods instead of isolated containers and keep the API small by just supporting the later. |
|
Though, we can use the plural in the API "startIsolatedContainers" instead of "startIsolatedPod" of you like. Both are synonymous and would expect a list of container definitions aka a pod definition as argument. |
bc78562 to
ffefc6a
Compare
Signed-off-by: Lukas Frank <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Lukas Frank <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Lukas Frank <[email protected]>
ffefc6a to
5bb6e74
Compare
af1cb72 to
a47a049
Compare
5f56b68 to
bff6f2a
Compare
Signed-off-by: Lukas Frank <[email protected]>
bff6f2a to
f8370e4
Compare
guvenc
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks @lukasfrank for the improvements. I liked the way network is now separated.
It is in pretty good shape now but I still have some small remarks.
Signed-off-by: Lukas Frank <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Lukas Frank <[email protected]>
8a149a0 to
3121314
Compare
# Conflicts: # build.rs
No description provided.