astefanutti edited a comment on pull request #2464: URL: https://github.com/apache/camel-k/pull/2464#issuecomment-870775712
> > In the context of #2358, I'd rather tackle the CLI making the registry configuration optional, instead of making a _registry-less_ / _build-less_ platform. In the former, the `PlatformOrCollect` function would not fail when no registry address is provided nor can be auto-configured, but rather log a message that the operator won't be able to publish container images. > > The problem with this is the reason I implemented a build-less platform. It may be the case that a platform can be installed with an optional registry (`--registry none` makes it explicit and stops any attempt at determining an address automagically) but at that point, the install still completes with no registry but a BuildStrategy of `routine` and a PublishingStrategy of `spectrum` (see defaults.go). Given both these are set, it is then still possible for a user to execute `kamel install run ...` and attempt a build and return an open-ended set of errors caused due to no registry being available. Yes, that is correct, but I think that is acceptable, and address #2358 more directly. This is an advance use case, for power users that know what they are doing, so I'd rather keep in simple and _fail-later_ in that case, rather than introducing more complexity and artificial values for build strategy and registry configuration. > > So I'm not sure a log message would be enough to deter such a use-case from occurring. Therefore, the follow-on disablements are there to stop any build attempts and make it obvious as to why they have errored out. > > > As `--skip-registry-setup` option can be added to deactivate the existing fail-fast behavior. I expect that this avoids having to introduce artificial build strategy and registry address, like in the later approach, which IIUC, is the one you've proposed. > > Is `--skip-registry-setup` a new switch to be added? I tried to avoid having to introduce a new switch by utilising `--registry none`. > Not sure what you mean by 'existing fail-fast bhaviour' ... sorry. > I don't understand how a cli level switch would flag the platform without changing the default Build or Publish Strategies. Yes, that would be a new option. That is the point, #2358 is only about the CLI, it does not request nor need changes to the platform. That also avoids introducing asymmetries with the OLM installation. -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: commits-unsubscr...@camel.apache.org For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org
