account for types with custom unmarshalling during default enfocement #429
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
k8s-ci-robot
added
do-not-merge/work-in-progress
|
Can we have a test for this? |
k8s-ci-robot
added
size/L
alexzielenski
commented
Sep 20, 2023
|
We should put that on hold while we determine if we want to keep |
alexzielenski
changed the title
k8s-ci-robot
removed
the
do-not-merge/work-in-progress
|
/lgtm |
k8s-ci-robot
added
the
lgtm
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: alexzielenski, apelisse 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 |
k8s-ci-robot
added
the
approved
4 tasks
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Some types have surprising defaults such as
v1.Timediscussed in kubernetes/kubernetes#118771 (comment).Had further discussion about a solution and we agreed in kubernetes/kubernetes#109427 (comment) that removing implicit
{}defaults for struct fields with custom type is the best way to correct the schemas.Original fix was included in #419 (comment) but split off to keep things tidy.
/cc @apelisse