You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Currently, the API call for region and node sizes are just string[]. We should change this to an array of objects, to allow for some metadata.
As a starting point, I'd suggest an interface like this:
interfaceI{id: string;// the ID that is sent back to use this option. This would be the same as the string currently usedname: string|void;// the name the cloud provider gives - eg, `eu-west2` could be `London`. Default to code if not provideddisabled: bool;// if true, this means that the option would not be displayedavailable: bool;// if false, there is a temporary outage preventing deploymentmessage: string|void;// any message explaining the outagegroup: string|void;// allow for logical grouping in `<optiongroup>`. No grouping if `undefined`}
In my suggestion, the interfaces for region and node sizes would be identical because we want to communicate the same things.
Why is it needed?
These could be used for detecting and communicating cloud provider problems and giving a richer user experience. It would also direct users to the actual problem rather than assuming that the Kubefirst platform has a problem.
I've just experienced a cloud outage. It took ~10 minutes for ArgoCD to timeout and then a further few minutes debugging the problem. As a Konstruct employee, I know what I'm doing but still lost ~20 minutes. For a user in the wider world, they would likely lose much more time and would likely (wrongly) blame Kubefirst.
Is this missing feature preventing you from using kubefirst?
Yes
Code of Conduct
I agree to follow this project's Code of Conduct
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
What is your feature idea?
Currently, the API call for region and node sizes are just
string[]
. We should change this to an array of objects, to allow for some metadata.As a starting point, I'd suggest an interface like this:
In my suggestion, the interfaces for region and node sizes would be identical because we want to communicate the same things.
Why is it needed?
These could be used for detecting and communicating cloud provider problems and giving a richer user experience. It would also direct users to the actual problem rather than assuming that the Kubefirst platform has a problem.
I've just experienced a cloud outage. It took ~10 minutes for ArgoCD to timeout and then a further few minutes debugging the problem. As a Konstruct employee, I know what I'm doing but still lost ~20 minutes. For a user in the wider world, they would likely lose much more time and would likely (wrongly) blame Kubefirst.
Is this missing feature preventing you from using kubefirst?
Code of Conduct
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: