This repository has been archived by the owner on Feb 10, 2022. It is now read-only.
Adds default storage classes for Azure, AWS and vSphere #287
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
✅ Hey mcowger! The commit authors and yourself have already signed the CLA. |
|
We have created an issue in Pivotal Tracker to manage this: https://www.pivotaltracker.com/story/show/162817550 The labels on this github issue will be updated when the story is started. |
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What this PR does / why we need it:
This PR adds a default storage class for each of the currently supported IaaS types. Today, only a GCE storageclass is created, leaving AWS, Azure and vSphere users to figure it out on their own. This PR delivers a better out-of-the-box experience
How can this PR be verified?
Deploy to the relevant IaaS, and confirm the storage class exists with:
kubectl get scIs there any change in kubo-deployment?
No
Is there any change in kubo-ci?
No
Does this affect upgrade, or is there any migration required?
No
Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
#286
Release note: