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

bump go to 1.21 #443

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jan 3, 2024
Merged

bump go to 1.21 #443

merged 1 commit into from
Jan 3, 2024

Conversation

Jefftree
Copy link
Member

@Jefftree Jefftree commented Jan 3, 2024

/assign @alexzielenski

Since k/k is already on 1.21.

Integration go.sum changes were from running a go mod tidy in that directory.

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. label Jan 3, 2024
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: Jefftree

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 approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. size/XS Denotes a PR that changes 0-9 lines, ignoring generated files. labels Jan 3, 2024
@alexzielenski
Copy link
Contributor

It looks like k8s 1.26 is still in support and uses Go 1.19.

Is it possible that in the future we would need to bump the k8s dep on kube-openapi for a bugfix? If thats the case I think making this change would require the older versions of k8s use go1.21 also

@Jefftree
Copy link
Member Author

Jefftree commented Jan 3, 2024

That's a good point, although we'd most likely cut a new branch and add a specific commit off of the version of the kube-openapi dependency from the k8s version? Fast forwarding to the latest version is usually undesired since we don't provide backwards compatibility guarantees and could include unwanted features when we're targeting bug fixes. I haven't seen any cases of a bug-fix backport but if you feel that's an important use case I'm okay with delaying this PR.

@alexzielenski
Copy link
Contributor

Yes I see now we have a separate branch for releases that needed backports. Didn't realize that was our process for this repo.

/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 3, 2024
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot merged commit a9f8850 into kubernetes:master Jan 3, 2024
4 checks passed
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/XS Denotes a PR that changes 0-9 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants