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

Sort ingresses by creation timestamp #3582

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jan 2, 2019

Conversation

aledbf
Copy link
Member

@aledbf aledbf commented Dec 19, 2018

What this PR does / why we need it: ResourceVersion is not immutable. It can change if the ingress is modified. Switching to CreationTimestamp to avoid edge cases.

@aledbf aledbf added the do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. label Dec 19, 2018
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. label Dec 19, 2018
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files. approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. labels Dec 27, 2018
@aledbf aledbf removed the do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. label Dec 27, 2018
@ElvinEfendi
Copy link
Member

Given ingresses A and B where A is created before B and they both have same host but different paths pointing to different services and different set of annotations. In this case the annotations from ingress A will be overridden by the annotations in ingress B if they are server level.

With the changes in this PR, when an annotation in ingress A changes, it will have no effect. However without this PR, the new change would be effective since the resource version of A would be more recent.

That being said using creating time makes more sense. The case (where user overrides annotation defined in another ingress) I described above is a bad practice anyway.

/lgtm

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Jan 2, 2019
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: aledbf, ElvinEfendi

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

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot merged commit 6d8ffd9 into kubernetes:master Jan 2, 2019
@aledbf aledbf deleted the sort-by-creation branch January 3, 2019 03:09
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. 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/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants