Skip to content
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

Update vendor to Kubernetes 1.24.0 #4871

Conversation

MaciekPytel
Copy link
Contributor

Which component this PR applies to?

cluster-autoscaler

What type of PR is this?

Update vendor for CA 1.24 release

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. size/XXL Denotes a PR that changes 1000+ lines, ignoring generated files. labels May 9, 2022
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label May 9, 2022
This follows go update in kubernetes: kubernetes/kubernetes#109461
package provider // import "sigs.k8s.io/cloud-provider-azure/pkg/provider"
package provider // import "sigs.k8s.io/cloud-provider-azure/pkg/provider
Copy link
Member

@gjtempleton gjtempleton May 9, 2022

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Seems the test script is choking on this change, I wonder if it was manually fixed on the PR introducing it.

Looks like it was fixed in v1.24.0: kubernetes-sigs/cloud-provider-azure#1158

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I opened #4875 about this. The obvious solution is to carry the suspected fix in vendor, but I'd rather not do that if we can avoid it. Among other problems it may break anyone importing CA code (transitive dependency would be taken from original repo and not the fixed version in CA vendor in that case).

Let's see if Azure maintainers can help us with this one.

Manually removed the update to vendor/sigs.k8s.io/cloud-provider-azure/pkg/provider/doc.go
as per discussion in
kubernetes#4875.
@MaciekPytel
Copy link
Contributor Author

/hold
To allow review without accidentally merging while the discussion is ongoing on #4875

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. label May 11, 2022
Copy link
Member

@gjtempleton gjtempleton left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

One query for my understanding, but other than that (and the Azure issue):
/lgtm
/approve

@@ -151,6 +151,6 @@ func TestDebugInfo(t *testing.T) {

predicateErr := predicateChecker.CheckPredicates(clusterSnapshot, p1, "n1")
assert.NotNil(t, predicateErr)
assert.Equal(t, "node(s) had taint {SomeTaint: WhyNot?}, that the pod didn't tolerate", predicateErr.Message())
assert.Equal(t, "node(s) had untolerated taint {SomeTaint: WhyNot?}", predicateErr.Message())
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I assume this is a manually applied change to make the test match the upstream error message?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Correct, the test relies on the wording of upstream error message. The message has changed upstream and so I had to update the test.

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label May 11, 2022
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: gjtempleton, MaciekPytel

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

@MaciekPytel
Copy link
Contributor Author

/hold cancel
Got agreement on the approach in #4875 (comment), no reason to hold any longer.

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot removed the do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. label May 11, 2022
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot merged commit f69e14b into kubernetes:cluster-autoscaler-release-1.24 May 11, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. area/cluster-autoscaler cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. size/XXL Denotes a PR that changes 1000+ lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants