Initial commit #1
Conversation
vitus133
force-pushed
the
policy-lifecycle-actions
branch
from
25c0c59
to
db9799d
Compare
vitus133
force-pushed
the
policy-lifecycle-actions
branch
from
db9799d
to
b93ee8c
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
As general idea of having a cascade deleting of the policy object-templates from the spoke clusters is really nice and needed the use-cases in the proposal are good examples for that. However, the conflict cases with policy remediationAction and complianceType need to be clarified. For example; when the policy remediationAction set to inform the deleteOption should not get applied. Another example; when the policy complianceType set to MustNotHave the deleteOption for partially orphaned will make conflict.
I believe the enhancement proposal need to list those cases and what decision will be made for each case.
| # - "orphan": remove any ACM annotations added by the policy and leave the object intact | ||
| # - "delete": delete the object | ||
| # - "revert": reverts the object to the pre-managed state (in case it existed before the policy was applied) | ||
| deleteOption: "delete" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
might be better to have the deleteOption also under spec so it get applied for all object-templates. Similar to the remediationAction in Policy & ConfigurationPolicy
|
Is this at least partially implemented by: open-cluster-management-io#67 |
/cc @serngawy @imiller0
I started to put up some stories and use cases for ACM enhancement proposal.
Opening this for comments about the format, content, ...
Cheers!