-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.2k
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
Discover an ability to configure Dashboard easier #15778
Comments
I still think it needs to be served through branding service |
Issues go stale after Mark the issue as fresh with If this issue is safe to close now please do so. Moderators: Add |
/remove-lifecycle stale |
A bit more detailed description of the idea: Branding Service is a REST API Service that is responsible for distributing branding settings like product name, icon link, docs links, CDN. We also need to customize client's behavior, like hide some functionality like Currently, the dashboard has embedded defaults that are used when it's failed to load product.json or when product.json misses requested parameters (like OSIO since it does not need to override everything). The proposal is to change it and make a branding service requirement for successful dashboard initialization. If it's unavailable - Dashboard should show general information about server misconfiguration/unavailability. It would prevent showing defaults (Che product name) in rebranded downstream ( like CRW ). A bit more about branding and how it can be configured by Admins on the installed cluster without rebuilding: If it makes any sense - we could also think about providing an ability to configure custom branding server endpoint(dedicated from Che installation). But then a custom branding server must follow the new API we introduce (new documentation links) and it can be error-prone. With embedded service - the defaults could be just used. We should think about safe solutions for downstream which need to override almost everything and they want to know when new properties are added. So, some validation may be enabled at some point. The alternative which can be considered as well: branding service as a standalone application(not part of Che Server)... It definitely has some cons but it would complicate things... So, personally I vote for Che Server embedded branding service. @benoitf I believe it's what you referenced, any comments? Update:
|
base64 image encoding is already in use in CSVs for Che and CRW; transforming the icon in Che to CRW as a whitelabel operator isn't too hard using yq to swap in a new image blob. /~https://github.com/eclipse/che-operator/blob/master/olm/eclipse-che-preview-kubernetes/deploy/olm-catalog/eclipse-che-preview-kubernetes/7.18.2/eclipse-che-preview-kubernetes.v7.18.2.clusterserviceversion.yaml#L220-L222 Could do the same with the css file(s) and other text artifacts. |
As mentioned yesterday I would avoid extending the che server API but rather:
|
Issues go stale after Mark the issue as fresh with If this issue is safe to close now please do so. Moderators: Add |
it's moved to the enhancement #20666 |
Is your task related to a problem? Please describe.
Currently, the Dashboard is customizable with
product.json
file which capabilities will be extended soon.But the current approach of overriding
product.json
is not so easy, it still requires repackaging Dashboard and then new Che with it.For example, Code Ready Workspace assembly /~https://github.com/redhat-developer/codeready-workspaces/tree/master/assembly/codeready-workspaces-assembly-dashboard-war/src/main/webapp/assets/branding.
Another case of configured Dashboard is che.openshift.io which does not change the branding but tune some default behavior (disable organization tab, disables workspace sharing, an ephemeral mode is enabled by default) /~https://github.com/redhat-developer/rh-che/tree/master/assembly/fabric8-ide-dashboard-war
This issue is about discovering an ability to configure Dashboard easier.
I can imagine that Dashboard could continue to have product.json but it would be a default configuration that administrators would be able to patch on Deployment level with ConfigMap, Volumes, etc.
But it's needed to be analyzed more and discussed with wider the audience.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: