-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 118
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
OCPBUGS-1730: Bump vendored K8S libraries to 1.25.2 #421
Conversation
@gcs278: This pull request references Jira Issue OCPBUGS-1730, which is valid. The bug has been moved to the POST state. 3 validation(s) were run on this bug
Requesting review from QA contact: The bug has been updated to refer to the pull request using the external bug tracker. In response to this:
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. |
nothing specific about router and |
/assign |
/retest |
/assign |
/assign @Miciah |
@@ -0,0 +1,819 @@ | |||
{{/* |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Is this file intentionally included as part of the bump?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Whoops I have no clue where this came from. Thanks for catching this, I don't think this is part of the vendor bump... Maybe it was just sitting in my repo when I did the bump.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Ah yea now I know. I created this file to test an alternative haproxy configuration. I didn't catch that it was still hanging out.
fc60040
to
46657f4
Compare
@@ -9,7 +9,7 @@ require ( | |||
github.com/fortytw2/leaktest v1.3.0 | |||
github.com/fsnotify/fsnotify v1.4.9 | |||
github.com/gocarina/gocsv v0.0.0-20190927101021-3ecffd272576 | |||
github.com/google/go-cmp v0.5.5 | |||
github.com/google/go-cmp v0.5.8 | |||
github.com/haproxytech/config-parser/v4 v4.0.0-rc1 | |||
github.com/openshift/api v0.0.0-20211201130627-34f305c3af47 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Does this need a bump as well? It looks like it was done for cluster-ingress-operator in #829
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Sorry just saw this comment. Hmmm, that's strange. I didn't explicitly do the bump of openshift/api in cluster-ingress-operator and nor did I do it here. Not sure why this didn't bump, but maybe it's a dependency chain that openshift/router is not triggering?
Do you think I should bump openshift/api to it's K8S API bump regardless? I'm not sure.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'd be inclined to say "no" only because if the router doesn't need the bump, then we probably don't gain anything by bumping it aside from keeping the future delta of the API changes smaller. WDYT @Miciah ?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Bumping openshift/api isn't necessary. There are no changes in it that would directly affect openshift/router.
/retest |
1 similar comment
/retest |
/label qe-approved |
Lots of errors, installation probably went wrong. |
Aside from the one pending (albiet non-blocking) question here these changes look good to me and I don't see any issues. If we do indeed need to bump /lgtm |
@gcs278: all tests passed! Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard. 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. I understand the commands that are listed here. |
@Miciah this should be ready for you to review and approve |
/lgtm |
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: Miciah 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:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
@gcs278: All pull requests linked via external trackers have merged: Jira Issue OCPBUGS-1730 has been moved to the MODIFIED state. In response to this:
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. |
Update k8s.io/api, k8s.io/apimachinery, k8s.io/apiserver, and k8s.io/client-go to v0.25.2 which maps to the overall 1.25 kubernetes release. Also bump github.com/openshift/library-go for its 1.25 support. All other vendor updates were automatically included as a part of these updates.