squakez commented on pull request #1912:
URL: https://github.com/apache/camel-k/pull/1912#issuecomment-763473046
Ready for review now. @astefanutti if you want to have a look :)
This is an automated message from the Apache
squakez commented on pull request #1912:
URL: https://github.com/apache/camel-k/pull/1912#issuecomment-762744944
> Right, resolving the version from the `IntegrationPlatfom` status is
actually a great idea! It seems to solve all our concerns. Now I feel bad I
distracted you with less
squakez commented on pull request #1912:
URL: https://github.com/apache/camel-k/pull/1912#issuecomment-762733070
> Great, let's dive into the `version` endpoint approach .
>
> The health and monitoring endpoints are delegated to controller-runtime:
>
>
squakez commented on pull request #1912:
URL: https://github.com/apache/camel-k/pull/1912#issuecomment-762201031
> > I am making the development to exec into the kamel operator, however I
am thinking about the possible security concerns. Should we allow the CLI to
run an arbitrary command
squakez commented on pull request #1912:
URL: https://github.com/apache/camel-k/pull/1912#issuecomment-762190832
> Another point is the retrieval of the operator version. Relying on
extracting the tag from the Deployment image may fail in a number of
situations, like when SHA pinning is
squakez commented on pull request #1912:
URL: https://github.com/apache/camel-k/pull/1912#issuecomment-760748643
> That is a great improvement! Here are my first feedback:
>
> * I wonder whether the `--operator` is necessary and `kamel version`
should just output both client and
squakez commented on pull request #1912:
URL: https://github.com/apache/camel-k/pull/1912#issuecomment-760257361
Few points I'd like to hear about:
1. I'm considering compatibility up to patch level (ie, 1.3.1 cli is
compatible with 1.3.0 operator, same for SNAPSHOT): does it make
