add staging project for K8s storage

[kmova]

we'll be using this to move our existing container
images generated by kubernetes incubator.

The projects are being shifted from kubernetes incubator
to kubernetes-sigs and as part of this migration,
we will start using the new image registeries maintained
by community infra with GCB + GCS

Ref: kubernetes-sigs/nfs-ganesha-server-and-external-provisioner#2

Signed-off-by: kmova kiran.mova@mayadata.io

[k8s-ci-robot]

Welcome @kmova!

It looks like this is your first PR to kubernetes/k8s.io 🎉. Please refer to our pull request process documentation to help your PR have a smooth ride to approval.

You will be prompted by a bot to use commands during the review process. Do not be afraid to follow the prompts! It is okay to experiment. Here is the bot commands documentation.

You can also check if kubernetes/k8s.io has its own contribution guidelines.

You may want to refer to our testing guide if you run into trouble with your tests not passing.

If you are having difficulty getting your pull request seen, please follow the recommended escalation practices. Also, for tips and tricks in the contribution process you may want to read the Kubernetes contributor cheat sheet. We want to make sure your contribution gets all the attention it needs!

Thank you, and welcome to Kubernetes. 😃

[k8s-ci-robot]

Hi @kmova. Thanks for your PR.

I'm waiting for a kubernetes 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.

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/test-infra repository.

[kmova]

cc: @msau42 @humblec @wongma7

[humblec]

LGTM.. Thanks !

[msau42]

/ok-to-test
This lgtm! Thanks for driving this.

I'm actually wondering if it's not too late to migrate the new csi repos to this since the name is broader in scope. cc @pohly do you think that would add too much complexity since the other repos may not use the same release tooling that we have for the csi repos?

[spiffxp]

Would it be possible to use a less generic name than storage? If the idea is to have a single group/location for all SIG storage subproject artifacts, my personal preference would be for sig-storage. @thockin @dims @bartsmykla @cblecker do you have any opinions?

[pohly]

do you think that would add too much complexity since the other repos may not use the same release tooling that we have for the csi repos?

So you want to replace the current k8s-staging-csi with a different staging area (sig-storage as suggested by spiffxp) also for the CSI repos? I don't see a problem with that. We just push into that staging area with the tooling in csi-release-tools and the other projects use whatever suits them. Promotion to k8s.gcr.io then is a manual process with some support via scripting, just as it is now.

[humblec]

Yeah, sig-storage looks to be a better name than plain storage, so it's better to use it. Hosting the CSI images in this repo would be my choice too. That will avoid much of complications and keep everything in a single place.

[kmova]

renamed storage to sig-storage.

[spiffxp]

/cc @jsafrane
I'd like to hear from @msau42 or @jsafrane as sig storage TL's to confirm they're ok with this direction

[msau42]

Yes to having one repository to host all sig-storage sponsored projects. I think the name is fine as well.
/lgtm

[spiffxp]

/approve
/lgtm

[k8s-ci-robot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: kmova, spiffxp

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

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• OWNERS [spiffxp]
• groups/OWNERS [spiffxp]

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

[spiffxp]

Ran ./infra/gcp/ensure-staging-storage.sh sig-storage

[pohly]

Was it intentional or an oversight that the final destination is still "storage" instead of "sig-storage"?

/cc @msau42

[msau42]

I think it was a mistake

[kmova]

It was a miss from my side @pohly. Raised this PR to fix it. #971