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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

replace usage of v1beta1 VolumeAttachments with v1 #74606

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Feb 28, 2019
Merged

replace usage of v1beta1 VolumeAttachments with v1 #74606

merged 1 commit into from
Feb 28, 2019

Conversation

andrewsykim
Copy link
Member

What type of PR is this?
/kind cleanup

What this PR does / why we need it:
As part of CSI post-GA clean up

Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
Fixes #

Special notes for your reviewer:

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?:

NONE

/assign @msau42 @vladimirvivien

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files. release-note-none Denotes a PR that doesn't merit a release note. cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. kind/cleanup Categorizes issue or PR as related to cleaning up code, process, or technical debt. needs-sig Indicates an issue or PR lacks a `sig/foo` label and requires one. needs-priority Indicates a PR lacks a `priority/foo` label and requires one. labels Feb 26, 2019
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added area/apiserver sig/api-machinery Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG API Machinery. sig/auth Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Auth. sig/storage Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Storage. sig/testing Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Testing. and removed needs-sig Indicates an issue or PR lacks a `sig/foo` label and requires one. labels Feb 26, 2019
@andrewsykim
Copy link
Member Author

/priority important-longterm

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added priority/important-longterm Important over the long term, but may not be staffed and/or may need multiple releases to complete. and removed needs-priority Indicates a PR lacks a `priority/foo` label and requires one. labels Feb 26, 2019
@msau42
Copy link
Member

msau42 commented Feb 26, 2019

Does this etcd test also need to be updated?

Also this e2e test

@msau42
Copy link
Member

msau42 commented Feb 26, 2019

/test pull-kubernetes-e2e-gce-alpha-features

@andrewsykim
Copy link
Member Author

For test/integration/etcd/data.go, I wasn't sure if we should be removing the v1alpha1/v1beta1 test cases because the PR removes callers but doesn't actually remove the API versions.

@msau42
Copy link
Member

msau42 commented Feb 26, 2019

For test/integration/etcd/data.go, I wasn't sure if we should be removing the v1alpha1/v1beta1 test cases because the PR removes callers but doesn't actually remove the API versions.

I don't think we should remove the API versions, but is the test defaulting to v1beta?

@andrewsykim
Copy link
Member Author

Ooh I see now, I'll update that, thanks!

@andrewsykim andrewsykim force-pushed the cleanup-volumeattachment branch 2 times, most recently from 2f6e2ca to e061430 Compare February 27, 2019 01:08
andrewsykim
andrewsykim commented Feb 27, 2019
View reviewed changes
pkg/kubeapiserver/default_storage_factory_builder.go Outdated
@@ -54,7 +54,7 @@ func NewStorageFactoryConfig() *StorageFactoryConfig {
DefaultResourceEncoding: serverstorage.NewDefaultResourceEncodingConfig(legacyscheme.Scheme),
ResourceEncodingOverrides: []schema.GroupVersionResource{
batch.Resource("cronjobs").WithVersion("v1beta1"),
apisstorage.Resource("volumeattachments").WithVersion("v1beta1"),
apisstorage.Resource("volumeattachments").WithVersion("v1"),
Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Curious if this is still needed

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

v1 is the preferred version, you can drop this line completely

liggitt
liggitt reviewed Feb 27, 2019
View reviewed changes
test/integration/etcd/data.go
},
// --

// k8s.io/kubernetes/pkg/apis/storage/v1beta1
gvr("storage.k8s.io", "v1beta1", "volumeattachments"): {
Stub: `{"metadata": {"name": "va2"}, "spec": {"attacher": "gce", "nodeName": "localhost", "source": {"persistentVolumeName": "pv2"}}}`,
ExpectedEtcdPath: "/registry/volumeattachments/va2",
ExpectedGVK: gvkP("storage.k8s.io", "v1", "VolumeAttachment"),
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

this is what verifies the data hitting etcd is in the version we expect, and this looks good

@andrewsykim andrewsykim force-pushed the cleanup-volumeattachment branch 2 times, most recently from 117f5f1 to e0440f8 Compare February 27, 2019 19:05
@andrewsykim
Copy link
Member Author

/milestone v1.14

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added this to the v1.14 milestone Feb 27, 2019
@msau42
Copy link
Member

msau42 commented Feb 27, 2019

/test pull-kubernetes-e2e-gce-alpha-features

@msau42
Copy link
Member

msau42 commented Feb 27, 2019

/lgtm
/approve

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Feb 27, 2019
@liggitt
Copy link
Member

liggitt commented Feb 27, 2019

/approve

@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: andrewsykim, liggitt, msau42

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 Feb 27, 2019
@andrewsykim
Copy link
Member Author

/retest

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot removed the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Feb 27, 2019
@andrewsykim
Copy link
Member Author

PTAL again, had to resolve a conflict

@msau42
Copy link
Member

msau42 commented Feb 28, 2019

/lgtm
/retest

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Feb 28, 2019
@fejta-bot
Copy link

/retest
This bot automatically retries jobs that failed/flaked on approved PRs (send feedback to fejta).

Review the full test history for this PR.

Silence the bot with an /lgtm cancel or /hold comment for consistent failures.

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot merged commit 711b310 into kubernetes:master Feb 28, 2019
@roycaihw
Copy link
Member

cc @cheftako

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@liggitt liggitt liggitt left review comments

@foxish foxish Awaiting requested review from foxish

@jsafrane jsafrane Awaiting requested review from jsafrane

Assignees

@vladimirvivien vladimirvivien

@msau42 msau42

Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. area/apiserver cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. kind/cleanup Categorizes issue or PR as related to cleaning up code, process, or technical debt. lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. priority/important-longterm Important over the long term, but may not be staffed and/or may need multiple releases to complete. release-note-none Denotes a PR that doesn't merit a release note. sig/api-machinery Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG API Machinery. sig/auth Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Auth. sig/storage Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Storage. sig/testing Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Testing. size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
v1.14
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet
7 participants
@andrewsykim @msau42 @liggitt @k8s-ci-robot @fejta-bot @roycaihw @vladimirvivien