kube-cross: Build v1.22-dev-1 image using etcd v3.5.0 #2123
Conversation
This is a version pattern change to encode more information into the image tag: v<kubernetes-release>-<config-identifier>-<revision> The image should be roughly equivalent to v1.16.5-1. Signed-off-by: Stephen Augustus <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Stephen Augustus <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Stephen Augustus <[email protected]>
k8s-ci-robot
added
do-not-merge/hold
k8s-ci-robot
added
kind/feature
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: justaugustus 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
approved
|
(The dependencies test is likely going to fail) |
| GO_VERSION: '1.16.5' | ||
| IMAGE_VERSION: 'v1.22-dev-1' | ||
| PROTOBUF_VERSION: '3.7.0' | ||
| ETCD_VERSION: 'v3.5.0' |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
remind me why etcd is included in kube-cross?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
possibly the the integration tests dockerized (e.g. on mac)?
would like to see this verified or we can just remove it.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@BenTheElder -- #2124 builds an image without etcd, but I haven't had time this week to test just yet.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Testing here: kubernetes/kubernetes#104400
|
@justaugustus: The following test failed, say
Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard. Please help us cut down on flakes by linking to an open issue when you hit one in your PR. 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. |
| @@ -1,25 +1,35 @@ | |||
| variants: | |||
| dev: | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
what's the difference between dev, canary, and 1.22?
|
A few random thoughts:
|
|
/hold for testing a different approach in #2124 |
k8s-ci-robot
added
the
needs-rebase
|
@justaugustus: PR needs rebase. 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. |
|
Due to Debian bullseye and Golang 1.17 upstream image updates happening roughly in tandem, the latest image builds shifted to using bullseye, instead of buster by default (ref: #2218). I'm combining this PR with go1.17 image updates in #2211 to tackle this all at once and minimize the image promotion churn. /close |
|
@justaugustus: Closed this PR. 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. |
What type of PR is this?
/kind feature
/area dependency
What this PR does / why we need it:
Part of kubernetes/kubernetes#102294.
(cc: @serathius @pacoxu)
This PR includes a version pattern change to encode more information into the
image tag:
v<kubernetes-release>-<config-identifier>-<revision>The v1.22-go1.16.5-1 and v1.21-go1.16.5-1 image should be roughly equivalent to v1.16.5-1.
Signed-off-by: Stephen Augustus [email protected]
/assign @saschagrunert @hasheddan @cpanato @puerco
cc: @kubernetes/release-engineering
Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
Special notes for your reviewer:
/hold I'm not married to this tag change, so open to suggestions.
Ideally, I'd like to accomplish the following:
dev) that allows us to test when we change dependencies that are not GolangI'll make changes to the
canaryvariant as part of #2117.Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?