Discrete helm charts for CA, VPA #8617
Conversation
k8s-ci-robot
added
release-note-none
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: jackfrancis 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
approved
|
/lgtm This seems fine, have you had a chance to test it? Or do you trust it will work? |
k8s-ci-robot
added
the
do-not-merge/hold
k8s-ci-robot
added
the
lgtm
| echo "Run from charts/: docker run --rm --volume \"\$(pwd):/helm-docs\" -u \$(id -u) jnorwood/helm-docs:v1.14.2" | ||
| exit 1 | ||
| fi | ||
| uses: losisin/helm-docs-github-action@v1 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I do think it would be better to use a GitHub Action instead of Docker. However, I’m curious why you chose this particular action. I’m not familiar with it, and I noticed it only has about 10 stars - https://github.com/losisin/helm-docs-github-action. So I’m wondering if it’s reliable enough for our use case.
Btw, I’m familiar with https://github.com/norwoodj/helm-docs, which has around 1.6K stars and seems to be more established.
Is there a specific reason you chose the other one instead?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
https://github.com/norwoodj/helm-docs is the official helm-docs project, but isn't a github action.
https://github.com/marketplace?query=helm-docs&type=actions is where I found this, it seems to be the best option.
If we think a lightly used action is not prefereable compared to doing it manually I can revert this change.
What type of PR is this?
/kind cleanup
What this PR does / why we need it:
In order to better manage > 1 project helm chart in the kubernetes/autoscaler "monorepo", this PR re-organizes the parent "charts/" directory within the
cluster-autoscaler/andvertical-pod-autoscaler/directories, respectively.Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
Fixes #
Special notes for your reviewer:
Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?
Additional documentation e.g., KEPs (Kubernetes Enhancement Proposals), usage docs, etc.: