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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
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
Clean constants #50170
Clean constants #50170
Changes from 4 commits
bef1dd4
4866367
92a9480
d5fb49d
49cc16c
6c380d4
02fe586
0807711
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
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.
This is for backwards compatibility from a pretty recent change, not sure we are ready to remove it? @keithmattix
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.
The intention is to remove in 1.22
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.
Yeah this is still a release or 2 too early; it just got merged in 1.20 IIRC
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.
But it is marked to be removed in 1.22
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 think I was probably too aggressive; 1 more release should be ok with an upgrade note
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.
agree with Keith (at the time of the comment being merged, I had worries about 1.22 being too early). Note Keith added the comment.
This code costs us nothing but changing now will break users
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.
This doesn't seem quite right because it doesn't take into account other dependencies? For example, when Service changes, we need to do a push. Even if Ingress doesn't change
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 also don't get why we can remove the AlwaysPush. The VS and GW we are pushing below have no spec, so won't they just always be skipped?
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.
as to
AlwaysPush
, we have annotation withistio.io
As to
This doesn't seem quite right because it doesn't take into account other dependencies?
Thanks for remind, need to revert it. Seems we have no way to distinguish unless updating the input. Let's keep the original
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.
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.
How is this fixed? I don't get it
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.
@howardjohn Take a look at the below logic, not only ingress but also gateway api go through this comparison
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.
wow that's extremely subtle and likely to break in the future. I really prefer the explicit AlwaysPush...
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.
Hmm, you know this stull of inner constant looks very hardcoding. I would like to remove all those by updating
configHandler
with an explicit arg, so we donot need to compare byneedPush
for some resources converted from ingress/gateway-apiThere 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.
But currently we cannot gert rid of
InternalRouteSemantics
annotation easily, cause it is used across the codeThere 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.
How about the labels of k8s gateways in
manifests/charts/istio-control/istio-discovery/files
?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 think we can remove too, as
gateway.networking.k8s.io/gateway-name
is also added