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

Fix ignored context when using kubeconfig #1147

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jul 23, 2018
Merged

Fix ignored context when using kubeconfig #1147

merged 1 commit into from
Jul 23, 2018

Conversation

igalarzab
Copy link
Contributor

No description provided.

@oscerd
Copy link
Member

oscerd commented Jul 19, 2018

This missing context seems to come from this commit.

86571db

LGTM

@oscerd
Copy link
Member

oscerd commented Jul 19, 2018

ok to test.

Maybe @igalarzab add a note on the CHANGELOG, just to track the fix.

@igalarzab
Copy link
Contributor Author

done :)

@oscerd
Copy link
Member

oscerd commented Jul 19, 2018

Thanks :-)

@oscerd
Copy link
Member

oscerd commented Jul 23, 2018

[merge]

@fusesource-ci fusesource-ci merged commit b78e130 into fabric8io:master Jul 23, 2018
@igalarzab igalarzab deleted the kubeconfig-context branch July 23, 2018 08:52
@@ -3,6 +3,8 @@
#### 4.0.4 (To be released)
Bugs

* Fix #1147: Cluster context was being ignored when loading the Config from a kubeconfig file
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

There is no issue number 1147

Copy link
Contributor Author

@igalarzab igalarzab Jul 23, 2018

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

it's the ID of the PR, not the issue (I don't know why I thought they were shared): #1147

They actually redirect: https://github.com/fabric8io/kubernetes-client/issues/1147

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

But it should be a issue Number, you fix an issue so

@oscerd
Copy link
Member

oscerd commented Jul 23, 2018

It should sufficient to add PR #1147 instead of fix #1147

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.

5 participants