You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
What would you like to be added:
Refactor 'destination' configuration for consistency across Backup and Application
Why is this needed:
In our current implementation, we have a destination configuration that behaves differently in Backup and Application. In Backup, it allows specifying a cluster, while in scenario Application, it allows targeting a group of clusters with a specific label.
This discrepancy can lead to user confusion as the goal is the same—to designate a target destination cluster for a task—but the method differs.
To address this, I propose we refactor the 'destination' configuration to support both settings methods—specifying a single cluster or a group of clusters with a tag—in both Backup and Application.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Xieql
changed the title
Refactor 'destination' configuration for consistency across Fleet and Application
Refactor 'destination' configuration for consistency across Backup and Application
Nov 8, 2023
What would you like to be added:
Refactor 'destination' configuration for consistency across Backup and Application
Why is this needed:
In our current implementation, we have a
destination
configuration that behaves differently inBackup
andApplication
. InBackup
, it allows specifying a cluster, while in scenarioApplication
, it allows targeting a group of clusters with a specific label.This discrepancy can lead to user confusion as the goal is the same—to designate a target destination cluster for a task—but the method differs.
To address this, I propose we refactor the 'destination' configuration to support both settings methods—specifying a single cluster or a group of clusters with a tag—in both
Backup
andApplication
.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: