carvel-dev / carvel-dev/kapp

Think about how we want the dangerous ownership override flag and the allowed apps flag to interact

Open
#997 0 comments 0 reactions 0 assignees View on GitHub
carvel accepted discussion enhancement
Dominant language
Go
Stars
1.1k
Forks
134
PR merge metrics
No merged PRs in 30d

Description

**Describe the problem/challenge you have**
As of today, I am required to supply the dangerous flag even after specifying apps we are okay with snatching ownership from.

**Describe the solution you'd like**
Food for thought:
1. Does it make sense to not require the dangerous flag while supplying app names explicitly?
2. Should we mark the flag we supply specific names as dangerous? Or is it not because the user is being specific here?

---
Vote on this request

This is an invitation to the community to vote on issues, to help us prioritize our backlog. Use the "smiley face" up to the right of this comment to vote.

👍 "I would like to see this addressed as soon as possible"
👎 "There are other more important things to focus on right now"

We are also happy to receive and review Pull Requests if you want to help working on this issue.

Contributor guide

Open the contributing guide

Assessment

This issue has not been assessed yet.

Get new issues in your inbox

A short digest of beginner-friendly GitHub issues.