On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 10:43 PM, Jimmi Dyson <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 3:24 PM, James Strachan <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> 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. Jimmy, would you suggest to create an issue at minikube to track/propose this?
_______________________________________________ Devtools mailing list [email protected] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/devtools
