Skip to content

Conversation

@felix-kaestner
Copy link
Contributor

No description provided.

@felix-kaestner felix-kaestner changed the title Rfc/device rfc: addDevice resource + controller and cisco nxos provider Jul 10, 2025
@hardikdr hardikdr added this to Roadmap Jul 11, 2025
@felix-kaestner felix-kaestner force-pushed the rfc/device branch 2 times, most recently from 4374715 to 16f2bac Compare July 14, 2025 12:11
@felix-kaestner felix-kaestner marked this pull request as ready for review July 14, 2025 12:11
@hardikdr hardikdr added the area/metal-automation Automation processes within the Metal project. label Jul 15, 2025
@felix-kaestner felix-kaestner force-pushed the rfc/device branch 3 times, most recently from 3e98cbf to 5bd24fc Compare July 18, 2025 07:21
Base automatically changed from rfc/interface to main July 18, 2025 08:31
@felix-kaestner felix-kaestner requested review from a team as code owners July 18, 2025 08:31
@felix-kaestner felix-kaestner force-pushed the rfc/device branch 9 times, most recently from e25ba55 to 5f7098b Compare July 22, 2025 13:33
@afritzler
Copy link
Member

From my point of view we can merge this PR. However one core issue I see is, that we are defining the resources as Namespaced objects. I would recomment to define those objects as ClusterScoped instead.

@felix-kaestner
Copy link
Contributor Author

From my point of view we can merge this PR. However one core issue I see is, that we are defining the resources as Namespaced objects. I would recomment to define those objects as ClusterScoped instead.

As discussed in #2 (comment), we would prefer to go with namespaced resources for now. We can easily convert to ClusterScoped if we need to in the future, whereas the other way around might be more challenging.

@afritzler afritzler changed the title rfc: addDevice resource + controller and cisco nxos provider Add Device resource + controller and cisco nxos provider support Aug 6, 2025
Copy link
Member

@afritzler afritzler left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@felix-kaestner do you have an idea why the linter is still timeouting? You think we can merge that?

@felix-kaestner
Copy link
Contributor Author

felix-kaestner commented Aug 6, 2025

@felix-kaestner do you have an idea why the linter is still timeouting? You think we can merge that?

Honestly, I have no clue. Let's tackle this as a follow-up as linting is not failing locally, it's just the action timing out.

@felix-kaestner felix-kaestner merged commit 221d0a1 into main Aug 6, 2025
6 of 7 checks passed
@github-project-automation github-project-automation bot moved this to Done in Roadmap Aug 6, 2025
@felix-kaestner felix-kaestner deleted the rfc/device branch August 6, 2025 11:25
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

area/metal-automation Automation processes within the Metal project.

Projects

Status: Done

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

7 participants