Skip to content

Conversation

@vmarmol
Copy link
Contributor

@vmarmol vmarmol commented Apr 27, 2015

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I found the current implementation takes a *kubecontainer.Pod. But that's the identical. Both work :)

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

That's a good point. We need to standardize on one or the other. Right now everything in the interface takes api.Pod even when it doesn't need to. We can start with this one.

Changed it to Pod.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

SGTM.

@dchen1107
Copy link
Member

LGTM. Are we going to implement PortForward to rkt support now?

@yifan-gu
Copy link
Contributor

@dchen1107 I think I can implement that. It's almost the same as the docker one. We just need the pid for the "pod", which is available via rkt status

@dchen1107
Copy link
Member

SGTM. Will merge it once it is green.

@vmarmol
Copy link
Contributor Author

vmarmol commented Apr 27, 2015

Travis is green! (finally...)

@dchen1107 dchen1107 self-assigned this Apr 28, 2015
dchen1107 added a commit that referenced this pull request Apr 28, 2015
Add PortForward to runtime API.
@dchen1107 dchen1107 merged commit 5ea5fff into kubernetes:master Apr 28, 2015
@vmarmol vmarmol deleted the rkt-portforward branch April 28, 2015 00:27
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants