Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Promote kueue apis to V1 #3476

Open
3 tasks
kannon92 opened this issue Nov 6, 2024 · 9 comments
Open
3 tasks

Promote kueue apis to V1 #3476

kannon92 opened this issue Nov 6, 2024 · 9 comments
Labels
kind/feature Categorizes issue or PR as related to a new feature.

Comments

@kannon92
Copy link
Contributor

kannon92 commented Nov 6, 2024

What would you like to be added:
Promote the core Kueue APIs to V1.
Why is this needed:
We would need to use Kueue in more of our products. Many customers would like a stable API to build on top of.

We would like to start the discussion for what it would take to promote the v1beta1(2) APIs to v1 and stablize the API.
Completion requirements:

This enhancement requires the following artifacts:

  • Design doc
  • API change
  • Docs update

The artifacts should be linked in subsequent comments.

@kannon92 kannon92 added the kind/feature Categorizes issue or PR as related to a new feature. label Nov 6, 2024
@kannon92
Copy link
Contributor Author

kannon92 commented Nov 6, 2024

#3192 (comment)

Some context is above.

@kannon92
Copy link
Contributor Author

kannon92 commented Nov 6, 2024

It is not clear to me if #768 must be satisfied before we promote to V1 or not.

@mimowo
Copy link
Contributor

mimowo commented Nov 6, 2024

Actually, we use in Kueue both alpha and beta.

I'm wondering if we could migrate to v1 only a subset of API which we consider already stable (like Workload, LQ, CQ and so on), while keeping the other still in alpha or beta (like Topology or MultiKueue, or other new features).

This would give us more flexibility and serial that we promote APIs which aren't battle tested yet. In any case new features to Kueue will start in Alpha.

WDYT @kannon92 @tenzen-y ?

@mimowo
Copy link
Contributor

mimowo commented Nov 6, 2024

It is not clear to me if #768 must be satisfied before we promote to V1 or not.

This is wishlist for v1beta2, so yes, this should happen before v1

@kannon92
Copy link
Contributor Author

kannon92 commented Nov 6, 2024

This would give us more flexibility and serial that we promote APIs which aren't battle tested yet. In any case new features to Kueue will start in Alpha.

I don't think we need features to start in alpha API fields. Unless we are introducing a new API field entirely. One can always add a new field to v1 or v1beta API.

@kannon92
Copy link
Contributor Author

kannon92 commented Nov 6, 2024

This is whitelist for v1beta2, so yes, this should happen before v1

My concern is not there isn't really a hard and fast rule on this one so I worry that it will stay as a wishlist with this API in beta while we add more items to it.

@mimowo
Copy link
Contributor

mimowo commented Nov 6, 2024

When I was talking about new features I was thinking that the API objects, like recently introduced Topology or Cohort, should go via Alpha API. For extending existing objects, sure we have no choice than extend them.

As for the wishlist, I'm with you, I would like to promote the APIs, but the list is long and so think it will be safer and with less friction if we move via interim step of v1beta2 than directly to v1.

@tenzen-y
Copy link
Member

tenzen-y commented Nov 6, 2024

As I commented in #3192 (comment), I would like to wait any API graduation (even v1beta2) for the graduation of the TAS and HirarchyCohort since both are still alpha stage and potentially plan API change.

@kannon92
Copy link
Contributor Author

kannon92 commented Nov 7, 2024

I'm wondering if we could migrate to v1 only a subset of API which we consider already stable (like Workload, LQ, CQ and so on), while keeping the other still in alpha or beta (like Topology or MultiKueue, or other new features).

@tenzen-y is there room to do something like this?

I would really like to see some kind of stabilization of the API for at least the core resources.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
kind/feature Categorizes issue or PR as related to a new feature.
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants