Skip to content

docs: replace "ephemeral cluster" with "Bonfire host cluster" in namespace workflow#592

Open
redhat-ship-help wants to merge 1 commit intoopenshift:mainfrom
redhat-ship-help:fix/bonfire-host-cluster-terminology
Open

docs: replace "ephemeral cluster" with "Bonfire host cluster" in namespace workflow#592
redhat-ship-help wants to merge 1 commit intoopenshift:mainfrom
redhat-ship-help:fix/bonfire-host-cluster-terminology

Conversation

@redhat-ship-help
Copy link
Copy Markdown

Summary

Replaces all 13 occurrences of "ephemeral cluster" with "Bonfire host cluster" in the ephemeral-namespace-workflow how-to page introduced by #590.

Motivation

In OpenShift CI, "ephemeral cluster" conventionally refers to temporary clusters that are provisioned, tested, and then destroyed (e.g. via the ipi-install workflow or the Ephemeral Clusters in Konflux CI feature).

The permanent, long-lived cluster that hosts the Ephemeral Namespace Operator and Bonfire namespace pools is not ephemeral — it is a central host cluster. Calling it "the ephemeral cluster" in the documentation creates confusion with the established meaning of the term.

This PR updates the prose to refer to it as the Bonfire host cluster to clearly distinguish it from actual ephemeral (temporary) clusters.

What changed

  • 13 occurrences of "ephemeral cluster" → "Bonfire host cluster" in content/en/how-tos/ephemeral-namespace-workflow.md
  • File names in SHARED_DIR (ephemeral-kubeconfig, ephemeral-cluster-server, ephemeral-namespace) are unchanged — these are actual artifact names used by the workflow steps
  • The ASCII diagram alignment is preserved

What did NOT change

  • No changes to any other files
  • No changes to code-level references (file names, secret names, step names)
  • The term "ephemeral namespace" is kept as-is — namespaces are ephemeral (short-lived)

/cc @openshift/ci-docs-reviewers

…space workflow

In OpenShift CI, "ephemeral cluster" conventionally refers to temporary
clusters that are created, tested, and destroyed. The permanent central
cluster used for Bonfire namespace management is not ephemeral — it is
a long-lived host cluster.

This commit updates the ephemeral-namespace-workflow documentation
(introduced in PR openshift#590) to use "Bonfire host cluster" instead of
"ephemeral cluster" when referring to the permanent cluster that hosts
the Ephemeral Namespace Operator and namespace pools.

File names in SHARED_DIR (ephemeral-kubeconfig, ephemeral-cluster-server,
ephemeral-namespace) are left unchanged as they are actual artifact names
used by the workflow steps.
@openshift-ci
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Apr 6, 2026

@redhat-ship-help: GitHub didn't allow me to request PR reviews from the following users: openshift/ci-docs-reviewers.

Note that only openshift members and repo collaborators can review this PR, and authors cannot review their own PRs.

Details

In response to this:

Summary

Replaces all 13 occurrences of "ephemeral cluster" with "Bonfire host cluster" in the ephemeral-namespace-workflow how-to page introduced by #590.

Motivation

In OpenShift CI, "ephemeral cluster" conventionally refers to temporary clusters that are provisioned, tested, and then destroyed (e.g. via the ipi-install workflow or the Ephemeral Clusters in Konflux CI feature).

The permanent, long-lived cluster that hosts the Ephemeral Namespace Operator and Bonfire namespace pools is not ephemeral — it is a central host cluster. Calling it "the ephemeral cluster" in the documentation creates confusion with the established meaning of the term.

This PR updates the prose to refer to it as the Bonfire host cluster to clearly distinguish it from actual ephemeral (temporary) clusters.

What changed

  • 13 occurrences of "ephemeral cluster" → "Bonfire host cluster" in content/en/how-tos/ephemeral-namespace-workflow.md
  • File names in SHARED_DIR (ephemeral-kubeconfig, ephemeral-cluster-server, ephemeral-namespace) are unchanged — these are actual artifact names used by the workflow steps
  • The ASCII diagram alignment is preserved

What did NOT change

  • No changes to any other files
  • No changes to code-level references (file names, secret names, step names)
  • The term "ephemeral namespace" is kept as-is — namespaces are ephemeral (short-lived)

/cc @openshift/ci-docs-reviewers

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository.

@openshift-ci
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Apr 6, 2026

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: redhat-ship-help
Once this PR has been reviewed and has the lgtm label, please assign psalajova for approval. For more information see the Code Review Process.

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

Details Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the needs-ok-to-test Indicates a PR that requires an org member to verify it is safe to test. label Apr 6, 2026
@openshift-ci
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Apr 6, 2026

Hi @redhat-ship-help. Thanks for your PR.

I'm waiting for a openshift member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with /ok-to-test on its own line. Until that is done, I will not automatically test new commits in this PR, but the usual testing commands by org members will still work.

Regular contributors should join the org to skip this step.

Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the ok-to-test label.

I understand the commands that are listed here.

Details

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository.

@jupierce
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

jupierce commented Apr 6, 2026

/ok-to-test

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added ok-to-test Indicates a non-member PR verified by an org member that is safe to test. and removed needs-ok-to-test Indicates a PR that requires an org member to verify it is safe to test. labels Apr 6, 2026
@openshift-ci
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Apr 6, 2026

@redhat-ship-help: The following test failed, say /retest to rerun all failed tests or /retest-required to rerun all mandatory failed tests:

Test name Commit Details Required Rerun command
ci/prow/links a296e22 link true /test links

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard.

Details

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository. I understand the commands that are listed here.

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

Labels

ok-to-test Indicates a non-member PR verified by an org member that is safe to test.

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants