Skip to content

Fix expireAfter placement in NAP disruption documentation - #462

Open
Ahmed Muhi (ahmedmuhi) wants to merge 1 commit into
MicrosoftDocs:mainfrom
ahmedmuhi:docs/fix-nap-disruption-expireafter
Open

Fix expireAfter placement in NAP disruption documentation#462
Ahmed Muhi (ahmedmuhi) wants to merge 1 commit into
MicrosoftDocs:mainfrom
ahmedmuhi:docs/fix-nap-disruption-expireafter

Conversation

@ahmedmuhi

Copy link
Copy Markdown

The NAP disruption article currently places expireAfter under
spec.disruption, but Karpenter v1 defines the field under
spec.template.spec.

PR #361 previously corrected the same Karpenter v1 field placement in the NAP
NodePool documentation.

This change updates the remaining affected field reference and YAML examples
in the disruption article.

Upstream reference:
https://karpenter.sh/docs/concepts/nodepools/#spectemplatespecexpireafter

@prmerger-automator

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Ahmed Muhi (@ahmedmuhi) : Thanks for your contribution! The author(s) and reviewer(s) have been notified to review your proposed change.

1 similar comment
@prmerger-automator

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Ahmed Muhi (@ahmedmuhi) : Thanks for your contribution! The author(s) and reviewer(s) have been notified to review your proposed change.

@learn-build-service-prod

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Learn Build status updates of commit f37412e:

✅ Validation status: passed

File Status Preview URL Details
articles/aks/node-auto-provisioning-disruption.md ✅Succeeded

For more details, please refer to the build report.

@v-regandowner

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Erin Schaffer (@schaffererin)

Can you review the proposed changes?

IMPORTANT: When the changes are ready for publication, adding a #sign-off comment is the best way to signal that the PR is ready for the review team to merge.

#label:"aq-pr-triaged"
@MicrosoftDocs/public-repo-pr-review-team

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants