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

Node Authorizer Fixes #5868

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Oct 3, 2018
Merged

Conversation

gambol99
Copy link
Contributor

@gambol99 gambol99 commented Oct 3, 2018

  • fixing the logging message, variable were wrong way around
  • fixing up the client for reboots ... somewhat of a oversight on my part :-)
  • added the reason to the node denial message
  • fixing up the prometheus metrics annotation to indicate a https scheme

- fixing up the client for reboots ... somewhat of a oversight on my part :-)
- added the reason to the node denial message
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. size/S Denotes a PR that changes 10-29 lines, ignoring generated files. approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. labels Oct 3, 2018
// @step: if we have a kubecfg already we can skip it
if utils.FileExists(config.KubeConfigPath) {
utils.Logger.Info("skipping the client authorization as kubecfg found",
zap.String("kubecfg", config.KubeConfigPath))
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

kubecfg or kubeconfig, bit confused with a few lines up in the file?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I never really got the standard but as far as I can remember Kubernetes uses the KUBECONFIG environment variable, thus I’d keep it consistent - especially in output.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

agreed and fixed in 8746f93

@KashifSaadat
Copy link
Contributor

The changes look good, one small update for consistency on the logging :)

@KashifSaadat
Copy link
Contributor

Thanks!

/lgtm

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Oct 3, 2018
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: gambol99, KashifSaadat

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 [KashifSaadat,gambol99]

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 merged commit c81a0c6 into kubernetes:master Oct 3, 2018
@gambol99 gambol99 deleted the fix_up_client branch October 3, 2018 13:24
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/S Denotes a PR that changes 10-29 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

4 participants