-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.3k
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鈥檒l occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
馃尡 ClusterClass: change PatchSelectorMatch fields to non-pointer #5757
馃尡 ClusterClass: change PatchSelectorMatch fields to non-pointer #5757
Conversation
Signed-off-by: Stefan B眉ringer buringerst@vmware.com
@sbueringer: 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. |
Diff is fine because the struct has not been released (yet) |
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.
/lgtm
Thanks for changing this!
/lgtm @vincepri PTAL |
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.
/approve
/lgtm
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: vincepri 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 |
Signed-off-by: Stefan B眉ringer buringerst@vmware.com
What this PR does / why we need it:
This PR changes the fields of PatchSelectorMatch to non-pointer. I think it makes sense because there is no semantical difference between nil and the zero value.
It's simply easier to handle the fields if they are no pointers and as they don't have to be ...
Which issue(s) this PR fixes (optional, in
fixes #<issue number>(, fixes #<issue_number>, ...)
format, will close the issue(s) when PR gets merged):Follow-up to #5735 (comment)