Graduate seccomp profile from v1alpha1 to v1beta1

[saschagrunert]

What type of PR is this?

/kind api-change

What this PR does / why we need it:

Graduate the seccomp profile API. This also changes the imports to not mention the API version any more for easier graduation later on.

Which issue(s) this PR fixes:

None

Does this PR have test?

None

Special notes for your reviewer:

None

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?

Graduate seccomp profile API from `v1alpha1` to `v1beta1`

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

Merging #674 (dcbf699) into master (77a3c30) will not change coverage.
The diff coverage is 28.57%.

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master     #674   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   51.67%   51.67%           
=======================================
  Files          31       31           
  Lines        2061     2061           
=======================================
  Hits         1065     1065           
  Misses        943      943           
  Partials       53       53           

[jhrozek]

I agree that seccomp in general has been stable enough to promote. And it would make a nice 0.4.0 release highlight. The only thing I wanted to change for a long time API-wise is to address issue #408. That's technically in the secprofnodestatus API though.

I'm explicitly not marking as LGTM because I think API graduation patches should have multiple reviewers. But, looks-good-to-me :-)

[JAORMX]

@jhrozek would solving #408 affect the API? I'm fine with deferring this graduation until that is solved.

[jhrozek]

On Wed, Nov 17, 2021 at 02:44:50AM -0800, Juan Osorio Robles wrote: @jhrozek would solving #408 affect the API? I'm fine with deferring this graduation until that is solved.

It will not (I actually took the time to carefully look at the code). But let me fix 408 anyway, it's been open for too long :-)

[jhrozek]

On Wed, Nov 17, 2021 at 02:44:50AM -0800, Juan Osorio Robles wrote: @jhrozek would solving #408 affect the API? I'm fine with deferring this graduation until that is solved.
It will not (I actually took the time to carefully look at the code). But let me fix 408 anyway, it's been open for too long :-)

I opened the PR for 408 and it didn't change anything except a label. And because this PR has been open long enough for people to voice their opposition, I'm going to mark it for merging. If I screwed up, you can yell at me tomorrow over video.

[jhrozek]

/lgtm

[k8s-ci-robot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: jhrozek, saschagrunert

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:

• OWNERS [jhrozek,saschagrunert]

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment