squakez commented on issue #4024:
URL: https://github.com/apache/camel-k/issues/4024#issuecomment-1413991905

   > Very interesting idea, here are my first questions/remarks
   > 
   >     1. What would be the expected content of your git project, to be able 
to launch it with the `kamel run` command?
   > 
   
   We should agree on the expected format, for now I can think about the 
outcome of the `camel export`
   
   >     2. Don't you believe that allowing github URLs could be seen as an 
open door to security issues?
   > 
   
   Not really. What we need to analyze is how to secure the access to a Git 
repo (github was an example, it could be any enterprise source code repo).
   
   >     3. Does it mean that the dependency management is delegated to Camel 
JBang? This would mean, we won't have dependencies in IntegrationKit and Build, 
is that correct?
   > 
   
   We still need both IntegrationKit and Build. What I'd like to analyze is the 
feasibility of `camel` to produce a Maven project from a Camel route (that's 
what we're already doing in Camel K, but I'd like to see if we can delegate 
that part)
   
   >     4. Having the project workspace in a local directory could be an issue 
in a cluster, indeed, if the master dies after generating the project you could 
have a problem later resuming the build from another node. Maybe it should 
rather be compressed and stored into a ConfigMap, shouldn't it?
   > 
   
   This is already the way it works (we store everything in /tmp/): if the 
operator crash and it's rescheduled, it should restart a Project. However the 
possibility to use a stateful storage is something we should evaluate, because 
it intersect with the requirement to build with `pod` strategy (a bit of a 
discussion in #3831). At this stage I'd prefer not to go in low level analysis, 
it would be some implementation detail we should understand. I'd love to use 
something like a Configmap, but the problem is the size limitation we have as 
it can only store 1 MB data.
   
   >     5. Why have a dedicated CR for this purpose instead of eventually a 
new trait?
   
   I think it would simplify the generation and the error that can happen when 
a Project is created. Also it would simplify the kick off of a Build which 
should watch for a Project to be Ready.
   


-- 
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

Reply via email to