cc/ @bgrant0607

One general problem I have is whether versions should be freeform strings, or parsed semantic versions, or what. I suppose pushing it off to the consumer is a fine solution?

I think the problem with "push it off to the consumers" comes when we hit the "apiserver must speak only the capabilities of the least capable kubelet software version (the first part of the tuple)" part of #4855. I suspect we're going to need to be able to send parsed semantic versions, like a Major/Minor/Patch ints. I can point you to internal Go parsing code for it, though, if you don't want to reinvent the wheel.

cc @davidopp @lavalamp

Though I still wish we had a concrete example of that case. :/

Based on my internal cluster management experiment, we used to run into the issues of parsing version info failed due to arbitrary testing binaries. I believe we might run into more parse failures with kubernetes after we have bring-your-own-node-to-cluster case later.

But I am fine with either approach though. @bgrant0607

Agreed. I just can't tell who is supposed to carry that burden.
On Mar 25, 2015 5:41 PM, "Dawn Chen" notifications@github.com wrote:

Based on my internal cluster management experiment, we used to run into
the issues of parsing version info failed due to arbitrary testing
binaries. I believe we might run into more parse failures with kubernetes
after we have bring-your-own-node-to-cluster case later.

But I am fine with either approach though. @bgrant0607
https://github.com/bgrant0607

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#5951 (comment)
.

As for where parsing, if any, should happen: definitely not in Kubelet.

LGTM. I assume you'll address the other comments. I think freeform string is fine for now; I don't think we have enough information yet to know what to put in a structured version.

We've already been parsing major/minor/patch of the k8s version itself for GKE, for deployment method forking. Kubelet version is going to follow that same prescriptive format. But you're right that the consumer can parse it just as easily, so, shrug, I don't particularly care.

Push changes?

Just pushed the changes, thanks!

Done! PTAL?

github is back, and travis and shippable are green. Ready to merge?

But before the merge, I do have a question. I included DockerVersion, but meanwhile we are introducing Rocket as another runtime plugin. Should we replace DockerVersion with ContainerRuntimeVersion in the format like "docker: 1.5.0"?

Discussed offline: Yes, ContainerRuntimeVersion is a good idea.

Made the change. PTAL?

LGTM