Skip to content

Conversation

jku
Copy link
Member

@jku jku commented Sep 8, 2025

Screenshot From 2025-09-08 12-10-59
  • There is a significant amount of repetition in the dashboard definition (version charts are identical except for location and client name) but I feel it's still more maintainable this way than it would be if the client version chart json was generated with complex terraform code.
  • This PR sort of depends on monitoring: Add metric for client user agents #90 (that adds the actual metric used here) -- I've kept this in a separate PR since that one already has a review.
  • cosign data is missing in screenshot because cosign does not use tuf in staging. Adding other clients is easier once this exists in prod and we can see which clients should be added

@jku jku requested a review from a team as a code owner September 8, 2025 09:12
@jku jku force-pushed the add-client-dashboard branch from 8b641c7 to e332221 Compare September 8, 2025 09:15
Copy link
Contributor

@haydentherapper haydentherapper left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM, just need a rebase

There is a significant amount of repetition in the dashboard definition
but I feel it's still more maintainable this way than it would be
if the client version chart json was generated with terraform code.

Signed-off-by: Jussi Kukkonen <[email protected]>
@jku jku force-pushed the add-client-dashboard branch from e332221 to 87a08d5 Compare September 9, 2025 07:35
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants