►
From YouTube: Kubernetes SIG CLI 20210929 - kustomize bug scrub
Description
sig-cli meeting agenda and notes: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1r0YElcXt6G5mOWxwZiXgGu_X6he3F--wKwg-9UBc29I
B
B
Okay,
great
so
starting
from
the
top
here,
the
converted
strings,
I'm
pretty
sure
we
actually
saw
this
one
last
time,
so
I'm
not
sure
why
it's
coming
up
again.
It
is
assigned
to
me
I
haven't.
I
see
it's
because
we
have
the
new
comment
that
it's
the
quotes
being
lost
inside
the
sigs
yammer
library,
which
is
not
surprising,
but
this
is
actually
a
fairly
big
issue
that
I
haven't
had
time
to
get
back
to.
B
It
could
affect
anything,
that's
supposed
to
be
a
string
field,
regardless
the
source
like
we're,
actually
losing
the
fact
that
these
are
explicitly
got
it
as
a
string
inside
their
customization,
but
so
we
can't
solve
it
at
that
layer
anyway,
that
is
triage.
It
is
assigned
to
me.
I
will
get
back
to
it.
Katrina.
A
B
The
amarillo
anchor
fix.
Yes,
we
were
very
excited
we
on.
On
monday,
we
released
customize
with
the
yaml
anchor
fix
that
we've
talked
about
at
several
previous
bug.
Scrubs.
It
was
one
of
the
most
requested
feature
fixes
for
the
past
months,
so
that
was
that
was
the
fun
release
that
we
did
on
monday.
So
it
sounds
like
this
user
tried
it
out.
B
B
B
C
B
B
B
B
B
B
So
my
thoughts
on
this
one
are
that
this
is.
This
is
about
the
old
style,
exec
generator,
as
opposed
to
the
krm
style.
One.
That's
newer
and
the
kep
that
we
have
open
right
now
proposes
deprecating
this
style
plug-in
in
general.
So
I
really
don't
think
it's
going
to
be
worth
the
investment
to
make
it
work
on
windows
if
it,
if
it
hasn't,
given
that
we're
proposing
removing
it
entirely.
B
B
B
C
B
B
D
B
C
B
B
Yeah,
this
is
another
one
where
I
think
I'll
just
assign
myself
to
respond.
We're
proposing
deprecating,
star
alert,
support,
direct
starter
support
as
well.
So
it's
another
thing
that
we
wouldn't
end
up
specifically
enabled
that
said,
the
exec
functionality
like
so
this
is
this:
is
the
care
and
flavor
of
of
plugins.
So
it's
in
the
right
family,
but
specifically
starlark,
is
proposed
for
deprecation.
Exec
works
super
similarly
and
has
many
of
the
same
classes
of
problems
so
I'll.
B
Take
a
look
at
the
code
to
see
if
the
reported
issue
would
also
affect
exec,
I
think
exactly
like
they
can,
just
if
they
know
the
problem
is
probably
knowing,
where
they're
being
invoked
from.
It's
invoked
relative
to
the
parent
customization.
So
knowing
what
the
file
ref
means,
if
they're
using
a
relative
path
inside
the
function,
config
itself
anyway,
I'll
assign
myself.
B
A
B
B
B
B
The
only
idea
that
comes
to
mind
is
that,
like
we
do
inject
additional
metadata
behind
the
scenes,
but
that's
under
annotations,
like
the
build
annotations,
for
example,
we're
actually
kind
of
messing
with
the
object
in
an
intermediate
stage
and
stripping
them
back
out.
But
that
shouldn't
interfere
with
the
line
of
the
metadata
itself.
And
in
fact
I
wouldn't
expect
it
to
affect
the
line
at
all,
because
it's
not
actually
emitting
it
emitted.
As
a
document
in
the
middle.
B
B
C
D
B
D
C
C
Well,
they
basically
want
to
change
the
entire
name
of
the
base
resource
and
like
they
want.
They
don't
want
to
have
to
reference
it.
So
I
asked
them
if
they
wanted
to
do
a
patch,
but
then
they
didn't
want
to
have
to
reference
the
resource
in
the
patch
target,
so
they
just
want
a
way
to
change
the
base
resource
name
without
having
to
to
reference
it
at
all,
which
I
didn't
really
understand.
The
use
case
for
when
we
have
prefixes
and
suffixes.
B
In
the
earlier
comment,
they
mentioned
that
it
changes
the
name,
so
my
guess
would
be
that
this
is
not
novel
configuration
like
it's
config.
That's
already
deployed
a
ton
of
places
and
they're
trying
to
change
the
way
it's
generated,
so
they
can't
at
this
point
they
don't
have
the
option
of
changing
the
names
on
all
the
objects
they
need
to
generate.
What's
already
there.
C
C
B
Right
because
they
decided
they
didn't
actually
want
the
name
prefix
yeah.
It
sounds
like
they
have
a
bunch
of
different
environments
that
don't
have
name
conflicts
because
actually
deployed
to
different
place,
different
api
servers
and
they
previously
managed
them
independently
at
different
endpoints
and
now
they're,
creating
a
diamond
shape
with
that
and
somehow
wanted
to
not
have
name
conflicts.
B
B
Yeah,
I
guess
we
need
to
confirm
with
them
that
that
is
what
they're
trying
to
do.
They're
trying
to
get
no
name
prefixes
they're,
going
to
have
the
output
of
customized
build,
will
actually
create,
contain
multiple
copies
of
the
same
resources
with
the
same
name,
and
if
so,
how
that's
going
to
work?
C
B
It
sounds
like
yeah
it's
because
of
the
way
we
do
it
internally.
That
name,
prefix
and
name
suffix
are
are
surfaced
as
separate
fields,
so
they
look
like
separate
transformers
to
the
end
user,
but
then
there's
a
single
prefix
suffix
transformer
that
gets
used
to
deliver
both
features,
and
it
sounds
like
they're
saying
yeah,
it's
the
configuration
for
it.
If
you
override
the
paths
that
the
transformer
uses
we
merge
them,
instead
of
keeping
separate.
B
C
B
I
agree
yeah,
let's
accept
it,
and
this
would
be
a
really
interesting
one
to
dig
into,
but
it
might
take
some
time
to
fix
if
anyone's
interested
in
really
getting
to
know
the
internals
of
how
customize
works.
This
could
be
a
really
interesting
one
to
pick
up
and
I
would
be
happy
to
support
somebody
pursuing
this.
B
B
B
A
Yeah,
I
have
a
ton
of
questions
with
regards
to
security,
how
you
should
be
treating
the
directories,
whether
you
should
be
treating
them
locally
or
the
base
path
from
where
you
actually
invoke
this
and
in
each
direction.
The
question
still
maintains
how
this
looks
security
wise.
Do
you
want
to
allow
escaping
the
the
context
yeah?