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鈥檒l occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

馃尡 ClusterClass: validate MachineDeployment topology name not empty #5951

Merged

Conversation

sbueringer
Copy link
Member

Signed-off-by: Stefan B眉ringer buringerst@vmware.com

What this PR does / why we need it:
Setting the MD topology name to an empty string leads to errors during reconcile, so this PR now
validates that it is not empty.

Which issue(s) this PR fixes (optional, in fixes #<issue number>(, fixes #<issue_number>, ...) format, will close the issue(s) when PR gets merged):
Fixes #

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. label Jan 18, 2022
@sbueringer
Copy link
Member Author

/cc @killianmuldoon @fabriziopandini

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files. label Jan 18, 2022
@@ -215,6 +215,21 @@ func (webhook *Cluster) validateTopology(ctx context.Context, oldCluster, newClu
return allErrs
}

// MachineDeploymentTopology name should be defined.
if newCluster.Spec.Topology.Workers != nil {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Would this check be better in check. MachineDeploymentTopologiesAreUniqueAndDefinedInClusterClass ? It's where we're doing the rest of the checks for the MDs (and it means we only have to parse the list once)

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It felt to me like it wouldn't fit into the name as the name is very specifically describing what it is validating.

WDYT about MachineDeploymentTopologiesAreValidAndDefinedInClusterClass

with that name, I agree let's move it there.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yeah the name change is good with me - there's no need for it to be that explicit as long as the comment is clear.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Fixed

Signed-off-by: Stefan B眉ringer buringerst@vmware.com
Copy link
Contributor

@killianmuldoon killianmuldoon left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

/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 18, 2022
Copy link
Member

@fabriziopandini fabriziopandini left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

/lgtm
/approve

@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: fabriziopandini

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 added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Jan 18, 2022
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot merged commit 4972cbb into kubernetes-sigs:main Jan 18, 2022
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added this to the v1.1 milestone Jan 18, 2022
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.

None yet

4 participants