feat: move ReconcileUtils methods to ResourceOperations accessible from Context

[csviri]

Signed-off-by: Attila Mészáros a_meszaros@apple.com

[metacosm]

I was thinking that maybe instead of KubernetesClientFacade, we could name it ExtendedKubernetesClient and return it from the getClient method of the Context but that would mean either:

• have ExtendedKubernetesClient implement KubernetesClient, hold an instance of the original client and delegate all method calls to it but that would mean having to track changes in the interface in this implementation, which might be annoying and easy to miss
• have a getUnderlyingClient (or whatever name makes more sense) on the ExtendedKubernetesClient class but that would mean that the client would be even "further" away (and in this case, KubernetesClientFacade would probably be a better name

Actually, the second solution is rather ugly and would be breaking the API anyway…
Also, for the first solution, the methods wouldn't really be at the same semantic level so both are probably a bad idea 😅

[metacosm]

Based on my last comment, I think we could keep the ReconcileUtils name or maybe ResourceModifier or ResourceChangeUtils (something to mean that it has methods to modify resources)?

[xstefank]

For some reason, I'm allergic tothe word "facade" :D

I think sth like context.operatorUtils(), context.operations(), context.sdkOperations() would be better

[csviri]

Based on my last comment, I think we could keep the ReconcileUtils name or maybe ResourceModifier or ResourceChangeUtils (something to mean that it has methods to modify resources)?

Naming is always a good question :)

Maybe ResourceUpdateFacade, ResourceOperationsFacade, at the end it is a facade on underlying APIs, or?

[csviri]

For some reason, I'm allergic tothe word "facade" :D

just saw your comment now, why are you allergic? it is actually quite expressing notion

[csviri]

For me utils suffix always impies some static functions...

[metacosm]

I'd vote for ResourceOperations, nice & simple. I'm not allergic to Facade but I also don't think it adds anything here :)

[csviri]

I'd vote for ResourceOperations, nice & simple. I'm not allergic to Facade but I also don't think it adds anything here :)

Sounds good, will change it, and finalize the PR. Thank you!

[xstefank]

I personally always find facade as an indication of an unnecessary abstraction layer.

sound good to me too, now only misses an implementation

[metacosm]

I've made a couple of changes to make things clearer and, in some instances, more correct. I will open a subsequent issue regarding the handling of the primary resource, actually.

[csviri]

I've made a couple of changes to make things clearer and, in some instances, more correct. I will open a subsequent issue regarding the handling of the primary resource, actually.

Sure, will check those Monday, we can interate on this more. I also want to create few additional issue. Thx!