Hi, Thanks Lajith for raising this discussion thread under the Flip title. To summarise the concerns from the other discussion thread.
“ - I echo Gyula that including some examples and further explanations might ease reader's work. With the current version, the FLIP is a bit hard to follow. - Will the usage of Conditions be enabled by default? Or will there be any disadvantages for Flink users? If Conditions with the same type already exist in the Status Conditions - Do you think we should have clear rules about handling rules for how these Conditions should be managed, especially when multiple Conditions of the same type are present? For example, resource has multiple causes for the same condition (e.g., Error due to network and Error due to I/O). Then, overriding the old condition with the new one is not the best approach no? Please correct me if I misunderstood. “ I see the Google doc link has been reformatted to match the Flip template. To explicitly answer the questions from Jeyhun and Gyula: - “Will the usage of Conditions be enabled by default?” Yes, but this is just making the status content useful, whereas before it was not useful. - in terms of examples, I am not sure what you would like to see, the table Lajith provided shows the status for various ResourceLifecycleStates. How the operator gets into these states is the current behaviour. The change just shows the appropriate corresponding high level status – that could be shown on the User Interfaces. - “will there be any disadvantages for Flink users?” None , there is just more information in the status, without this it is more difficult to work out the status of the job. - Multiple conditions question. The status is showing whether the job is ready or not, so as long as the last condition is the one that is shown - all is as expected. I don’t think this needs rules for precedence and the like. - The condition’s Reason is going to be more specific. Gyula and Jeyhun, is the google doc clear enough for you now? Do you feel you feedback has been addressed? Lajith and I are happy to provide more details. I wonder whether this change is big enough to warrant a Flip, as it is so small. We could do this in an issue. WDYT? Kind regards, David. From: Lajith Koova <lajith...@gmail.com> Date: Wednesday, 29 May 2024 at 13:41 To: dev@flink.apache.org <dev@flink.apache.org> Subject: [EXTERNAL] [DISCUSS] FLIP-XXX Add K8S conditions to Flink CRD Hello , Discussion thread here: https://lists.apache.org/thread/dvy8w17pyjv68c3t962w49frl9odoz4z to discuss a proposal to add Conditions field in the CR status of Flink Deployment and FlinkSessionJob. Note : Starting this new thread as discussion thread title has been modified to follow the FLIP process. Thank you. Unless otherwise stated above: IBM United Kingdom Limited Registered in England and Wales with number 741598 Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hants. PO6 3AU
