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

Remove support for the legacy etcd provider as of k8s 1.18 #8826

Merged

Conversation

johngmyers
Copy link
Member

This proposes to remove support for the legacy etcd provider for clusters running Kubernetes 1.18 or later.

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files. labels Apr 1, 2020
@olemarkus
Copy link
Member

I am all for getting rid of the legacy etcd provider, but isn't it better to do this based on kops version instead of k8s version? There is nothing in k8s that requires dropping legacy etcd, and as a user, it is always confusing when the k8s version is what determines what kops functionality is supported. I would rather go for a deprecation in kops 1.17 and removal in kops 1.19 or something. that will also let us get rid of the code. If we base it on k8s version, we'll be still stuck with the code "forever".

@johngmyers
Copy link
Member Author

This is in line with the pattern of not making substantial changes in behavior to existing clusters until those clusters upgrade Kubernetes. Eventually kops will drop support for Kubernetes 1.17 and the legacy manager code will then be removed.

@johngmyers johngmyers force-pushed the remove-legacy-etcd-provider branch 2 times, most recently from eb86039 to 9311c64 Compare April 5, 2020 23:20
@johngmyers
Copy link
Member Author

Conflicts with #8614 and want that PR to go in first because it is going to be cherrypicked.
/hold

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. labels Apr 10, 2020
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot removed the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Apr 24, 2020
@johngmyers
Copy link
Member Author

/hold cancel

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. and removed do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. labels Apr 24, 2020
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot removed the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Apr 25, 2020
@johngmyers
Copy link
Member Author

/retest

@rdrgmnzs rdrgmnzs added this to the v1.18 milestone May 22, 2020
@rifelpet
Copy link
Member

I see validateEtcdVersion still defaults to components.DefaultEtcd2Version if the version field isn't set. I wonder if it should be updated to 3.X but that can be its own PR.

/approve
/lgtm

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label May 28, 2020
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

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

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 May 28, 2020
@rifelpet
Copy link
Member

/retest

quay...

@hakman
Copy link
Member

hakman commented May 28, 2020

quay says they fixed it :)
/retest

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot merged commit 4b4dbd4 into kubernetes:master May 28, 2020
@johngmyers johngmyers deleted the remove-legacy-etcd-provider branch May 28, 2020 17:40
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. area/api area/documentation 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/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

6 participants