Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Custom labels through extra specs or podTemplate #28

Open
Hdom opened this issue Feb 26, 2024 · 1 comment · Fixed by #49
Open

Custom labels through extra specs or podTemplate #28

Hdom opened this issue Feb 26, 2024 · 1 comment · Fixed by #49

Comments

@Hdom
Copy link

Hdom commented Feb 26, 2024

What is the feature you would like to have?

I would like to be able to add custom labels through the extra specs or podTemplate.

I was hoping this was already possible and I tried enhancing the podTemplate in the provider config as follows:

podTemplate:
  metadata:
    labels:
      custom-label: custom-value

and it did not reflect successfully on the instance spec once deployed.

This seems to be because the merge functionality specifically merged the Spec object inside of podTemplate.

Anything else you would like to add?

We use labels for network filtering and this would be useful to be configurable.

@rafalgalaw
Copy link
Collaborator

Hi @Hdom sorry for the late response. I have added a new test via #49 which merges additional labels via the podTemplateSpec prop of the provider config, so with the current provider version this should work. Does this work for you now? Also feel free to raise a PR anytime you encounter any issues or need additional functionality :)

rafalgalaw added a commit that referenced this issue May 16, 2024
should resolve #28: tests merging additional labels into pod template
via `podTemplateSpec` of provider-config.
@rafalgalaw rafalgalaw reopened this May 16, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants