kubecfg VS lens

kubecfg does add some features, like https:// imports, oci:// imports (oci bundles in OCI registries, transitively bundling all imported files with jsonnet-deps).

But yes, I strive to keep the "one file, one target, import whatever you need but explicitly" as much as possible.

I'm pouring some more time into the project and trying to implement some ideas I had for a long time but never managed to get them out. For example "Flags From Files" (https://github.com/kubecfg/kubecfg/blob/flagspec/docs/rfcs/r...) or "Caching + optional vendoring of immutable external deps".

You shouldn't write those manifests by hand in any non-hobby project. https://github.com/kubecfg/kubecfg

Should kubecfg be used instead (having active development)?

We use kubecfg and it is what I would recommend to anyone looking to create a sustainable GitOps workflow at work.

Lens

Generally I felt as if I was diving in the deepest of waters without the correct equipement and that was horrifying. Unfortunately to me, I had to dive even deeper before getting equiped with tools like ArgoCD, and k8slens. I had to start working with... HELM.

Indeed you can, with several "paid" features removed, like log tailing and pod shells. They deliberately hobbled the product. If you want to use Lens, my advice is pay for the supported version.

yes I know there is lens, but it does not allow me to see logs of multiple pods at same time and what is even more important it is not friendly for ephemeral clusters - in my case with help of kind I am recreating whole cluster each time from scratch

Let's wait for few seconds for the pods to become green, I am using Lens, it's awesome btw.

You probably don't need Rancher unless you need a GUI or manage multiple clusters, Lens or k9s might be a better fit for your use case.

`openlens` is now preferred over `Lens`, it has everything you need and none of the fluff that Lens wants to charge you for.