Pulling an Image from a Private Registry is documented the upstream Kubernetes docs. To the best of my knowledge however, Tutor currently supports neither creating nor referencing a secret for image registry credentials.
This is a little trickier than it sounds though; in particular, the question is whether Tutor wants to (a) make this an either-or proposition, or whether (b) it wants to support both public registries (which require no authentication to pull images) and private ones (which do require credentials) in one deployment.
My Tutor Upstream B2 Pdf Download
DOWNLOAD 🔥 https://ssurll.com/2yGbWx 🔥
In the (a) case, the user would simply have to mirror all images Tutor uses in their own registry, in which case Kubernetes could pull all images from the same registry, using the same set of credentials. In the (b) case, Tutor would have to support that practically each and every image is hosted in a different registry, with a different set of credentials, and that might quickly get unwieldy in the configuration.
However, I am interested in more configurability within the k8s files in general. The sealed secret is one thing but adding resources much like this ticket describes would be ideal for our deployment. When deploying to the cluster we need to allocate the resource allocation manually via the Kubernetes interface on our third party hosted kubernetes cluster. Ideally we could configure this as well. Given I am new to the Tutor project I am not sure what the best way to implement this would be, but maybe something similar to the way custom theming is implemented? This may not be the best way of thinking about it given CSS is fundamentally driven by the cascading workflow supporting overiding out of the box, and I am not sure K8s supports this without implementing something like Helm.
Without adding another technology to the stack the other option I see would be to add more patching throughout the k8s files. Again with my lack of experience with the Tutor source code I am not sure that this is a good approach? If this was the approach ideally we could help contribute this code to the baseline and incorporate it in future realeases as opposed to forking the code and dealing with upgrade issues in the future.
And I think this sort of thing would have to live in Tutor proper rather than in a plugin, because this functionality would need to be used by other plugins as well. And it would be odd to have to re-implement it in all of those (for example, tutor-mfe would definitely need to be able to pull custom images, quite possibly from a private registry).
Hi @adambies! @fghaas is right that in general you should add your custom changes as tutor plugins. The tutor templates include a certain number of {{ patch(...) }} statements that allow you to add arbitrary content there.
So, we should have a way to easily manage private images, both for the local build use case and for deployment to Kubernetes. And for the Kubernetes use case, it should be equally applicable no matter if people self-host their Kubernetes, or run fully managed on AWS EKS, or Digital Ocean, or OVH, or whatever.
(a) where Tutor users run their Kubernetes, or if they run Kubernetes at all (the same approach might be useful for building images that are then used to deploy Open edX with, say, Nomad),
(b) what CI Tutor users run, or if they run with a CI at all.
Also, this whole functionality should be straightforward to make entirely optional, in other words, would suit itself to being a Tutor plugin. And (even when that plugin is enabled) for any upstream public images that the Tutor user does want to use unmodified, those would of course bypass the private registry altogether, as they do now.
On the other hand, having a dedicated image building worker is probably not an absolute pre-requisite for all tutor k8s users, so we should be able to make do without it. Users should be able to run tutor images build all locally, then tutor images push all, which will push to the k8s registry.
Enhancers increase gene expression, while silencers decrease gene expression.
Enhancers and silencers are regulatory elements found in DNA that control gene expression. Enhancers are sequences of DNA that increase the rate of transcription, resulting in higher levels of gene expression. They do this by binding to transcription factors, which then recruit RNA polymerase to the promoter region of the gene. Enhancers can be located upstream, downstream, or even within the gene they regulate.
Silencers, on the other hand, are sequences of DNA that decrease the rate of transcription, resulting in lower levels of gene expression. They do this by binding to transcription factors that inhibit RNA polymerase from binding to the promoter region of the gene. Silencers can also be located upstream, downstream, or within the gene they regulate.
Both enhancers and silencers can be tissue-specific, meaning they only function in certain cell types. They can also be activated or deactivated by external signals, such as hormones or environmental factors. The presence or absence of enhancers and silencers can have a significant impact on gene expression and ultimately, the phenotype of an organism.
In summary, enhancers and silencers are regulatory elements that control gene expression. Enhancers increase gene expression, while silencers decrease gene expression. They can be tissue-specific and activated or deactivated by external signals.
I figured from research that I could get some clients from either family or by using an online ad site (ones a bit like Craigslist but for tutoring). Then, I stumbled upon a tutoring "agency". It basically pairs you with students and handles the payment but takes a cut. I was a bit baffled by this startup. It also has a valuation of $1.7 billion so it's no blip.
My problem is that this (quite valuable) company doesn't seem to provide value to me as a tutor (or any tutor). From the advertised data, it seems that they take 5-40% of the sale price (it is quite vague). Not only is the rate lower than what I could make independently by a fair bit, but they proceed to take a pretty large chunk every lesson. However, they only provide value once, when they match me with a student (I guess they also handle payment, but that doesn't feel like it justifies the price tag).
It seems to me that this business model wouldn't be as good to invest in as something like "Gumtree/eBay for Tutors", where tutors can make listings. This provides the same value (finding a tutor), but at less cost to both parents and tutors, as it is a one off fee and not a continual one. Is there something I'm missing?
There is an interesting phenomenon in the world of eCommerce that the existence of an established online marketplace for a specific family of goods or services makes it very difficult to find clients without going through that marketplace.
The reason is that consumers consult that online marketplace first and immediately find what they are looking for. They don't even consider to look for people providing that service directly, because that's inconvenient for them.
All the small businesses who used to sell their goods and services directly now have to go through these large websites if they want to get any customers. They don't want to pay the commission or bow to the exploitative terms of service (including the obligatory "you must not offer your goods/services anywhere else for a lower price than through us" clause). But they are forced to, because the big marketplaces have all the customers.
What these venture capitalists see in GoStudent is that it might perhaps end up doing the same to the tutoring market. When that service ever manages to establish itself as the website you go to when you are looking for a tutor, then tutors will be forced to use it. Otherwise they won't get any clients anymore.
You aren't paying the platform for the value they provide to you as a tutor. The customer pays the platform for having a convenient way to find you. They are paying the platform through you, because you will have to increase your prices in a way that tutoring is still worth it for you if you subtract the hefty commission.
As a consumer, you might be able to buy your rice from a rice farmer, provided you are willing to find one who you can communicate with and who is willing to sell you one small bag of rice once in awhile. Or you can go to your supermarket and buy prepackaged rice at higher prices than the supermarket pays their farmers.
In your example (which I have not investigated in detail), one stream of value they might provide is a ready pool of tutors for students, possibly with some ranking system to identify the better and perhaps more expensive tutors, and a ready pool or students for tutors.
One aspect you may not be considering: how valuable is a $1.7bn company? Probably not nearly as valuable as you might think. This valuation certainly does not necessarily mean that somebody is willing to buy the company at that price. Instead it often follows from a bunch of misleading accounting: a whole multitude of funding rounds and price guarantees leading to extreme stock dilution meaning that only a tiny fraction of the company is paid for at that price leading to a hugely overestimated valuation. It's quite easy to engineer a new company over the one billion mark without that being very meaningful. -nearly-half-of-tech-unicorns-overstate-their-valuations-2017-8?r=US&IR=T
Now let me address the question from the perspective of a full-time self-employed tutor, then the agency, then the student/parents. The answer is: because using a tutoring agency is easier and less time-consuming than advertising yourself. It gives you an immediate way to apply to (tens of) thousands of students - in your local area - or otherwise (for example if you want to tutor non-local students online).
Looking back on the nine-month master's degree program, she elaborates, "I was reading about all these theories and creating hypothetical lessons and seating charts, but they had no real-world application. Every class I had was based on this utopian group of kids who all spoke English and functioned at the same level. I never learned how to modify or accommodate the diverse needs that I would find in my room." 152ee80cbc