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’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Fix cluster validation dependency on local kubeconfig #10221

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Nov 14, 2020

Conversation

eddycharly
Copy link
Member

This PR fixes cluster validation dependency on a local kubeconfig file.

Cluster validation requires a local kubeconfig file with a context having the same name as the cluster.
This PR replaces this requirement by providing a rest.Config, the same that was used to build the k8sclient used to communicate with the target cluster.

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files. labels Nov 11, 2020
@eddycharly
Copy link
Member Author

/cc @olemarkus

@eddycharly
Copy link
Member Author

Don't know why travis fails, it works fine locally. Is there a way to retrigger the job ?

@johngmyers
Copy link
Member

I wonder if we want to pass the whole config or just the Host.

@eddycharly
Copy link
Member Author

@johngmyers i wondered about that too. Maybe you’re right, passing only the Host will be simpler.

Thanks, I ’ll change that.

@eddycharly
Copy link
Member Author

/test pull-kops-e2e-kubernetes-aws

@@ -133,9 +126,7 @@ func (v *clusterValidatorImpl) Validate() (*ValidationCluster, error) {

// Do not use if we are running gossip
if !dns.IsGossipHostname(clusterName) {
Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Not sure if we should use host instead of clusterName here ?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

If we are using gossip, won't host be the load balancer DNS?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

You’re probably right, I don’t much about gossip mode.

@olemarkus
Copy link
Member

/lgtm

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Nov 14, 2020
@johngmyers
Copy link
Member

/approve

@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: eddycharly, johngmyers

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 Nov 14, 2020
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot merged commit 01b17be into kubernetes:master Nov 14, 2020
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added this to the v1.20 milestone Nov 14, 2020
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.

4 participants