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
When using the built container image as an Argo CD repo server sidecar plugin, it feels like it would be more intuitive to have the image tag contain the version of helmfile in it (e.g. 0.167.1-1). I do see that there are other things included in the Dockerfile which could be changed and affect functionality without having to change the version of helmfile itself. For this reason, I think it could be address by tacking a simple incrementing number to the helmfile version (...-1 in the example). Though there are multiple pieces of software in the container, it's really helmfile that's the centerpiece. Curious if this has been considered or what the thoughts are around this?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
When using the built container image as an Argo CD repo server sidecar plugin, it feels like it would be more intuitive to have the image tag contain the version of helmfile in it (e.g.
0.167.1-1
). I do see that there are other things included in theDockerfile
which could be changed and affect functionality without having to change the version of helmfile itself. For this reason, I think it could be address by tacking a simple incrementing number to the helmfile version (...-1
in the example). Though there are multiple pieces of software in the container, it's really helmfile that's the centerpiece. Curious if this has been considered or what the thoughts are around this?The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: