Hi, > >> Agreed. BTW 'minikube service foo` seems to work fine upstream on > >> minikube for services with nodeports - haven't tested on ingress yet (and > >> route isn't possible I suspect on minikube?) > >> > > > > No that's my point: the fact that we learned from minishift that users > > would want to see routes in `minishift service` should IMO have translated > > into contributing similar functionality upstream first to add ingress to > > the current nodeport output. Minishift would then add routes to output, > > but still the command `minishift service` would have been almost consistent > > in behaviour to `minikube service`, with that one difference around routes. > > > > OK, so let's see if we can fix this targeting the next point release.
Well, we start with an issue and take it from there. Personally I believe in this particular case we did the right thing. --Hardy
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Devtools mailing list [email protected] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/devtools
