Rename PodDisruptionsAllowed to DisruptionsAllowed in type PodDisruptionBudgetStatus #85863
Conversation
k8s-ci-robot
added
release-note-none
|
Hi @nan-yu. Thanks for your PR. I'm waiting for a kubernetes member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the I understand the commands that are listed here. Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository. |
|
cc @mortent |
|
/ok-to-test |
k8s-ci-robot
added
ok-to-test
|
/sig apps |
k8s-ci-robot
added
sig/apps
|
/test pull-kubernetes-e2e-gce |
k8s-ci-robot
added
priority/backlog
|
This change was originally part of the PR to make PDBs GA. This moves it into a separate PR to reduce the size and complexity of the PDBs to GA PR ref #81571 (comment). I will update #81571 when this is merged. /lgtm |
| @@ -47,7 +47,7 @@ type PodDisruptionBudgetSpec struct { | |||
| // PodDisruptionBudgetStatus represents information about the status of a | |||
| // PodDisruptionBudget. Status may trail the actual state of a system. | |||
| type PodDisruptionBudgetStatus struct { | |||
| // Most recent generation observed when updating this PDB status. PodDisruptionsAllowed and other | |||
| // Most recent generation observed when updating this PDB status. DisruptionsAllowed and other | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We should actually use the json name in the comment (disruptionsAllowed); I like to use backticks to make it even more obvious and less weird to start the sentence with a lowercase letter.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks for the comment. I checked comments for other fields in this file. We kind of use both ways, lowercase first letter (// allowedUnsafeSysctls) and uppercase first letter (// AllowedCSIDrivers is), but no backticks.
Given this sentence is not the start of the comment, I am inclined to keep it as-is to make it more in-line with other comments
@lavalamp ^^
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@liggitt we should probably document this more clearly-- looks like it's not covered by https://github.com/kubernetes/community/blob/master/contributors/devel/sig-architecture/api-conventions.md#naming-conventions, is it covered somewhere else?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Given that it's not officially documented I won't block the PR, I guess
(Note that it being wrong in other places isn't a reason I accept as valid for keeping it wrong here :) )
There was a problem hiding this comment.
hmm, not that I know of. need a godoc section in that doc, and an issue tracking sweeping existing types to fix docs
|
LGTM - let me know what you want to do about the comment. |
|
/approve |
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: lavalamp, nan-yu 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 |
k8s-ci-robot
added
the
approved
Rename PodDisruptionsAllowed to DisruptionsAllowed in type PodDisruptionBudgetStatus Kubernetes-commit: b8ce44f
What type of PR is this?
/kind cleanup
What this PR does / why we need it:
Update the field name to follow the same naming convention
Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
Fixes #
Special notes for your reviewer:
Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?:
Additional documentation e.g., KEPs (Kubernetes Enhancement Proposals), usage docs, etc.: