draft release notes for kubernetes v1.4.0 #33410

Merged
merged 6 commits into from Sep 24, 2016

Conversation

@spiffxp
Member

spiffxp commented Sep 23, 2016

Blatantly ignoring the PR template, sorry

This is a handoff from draft release notes at https://gist.github.com/spiffxp/9c460230314527d759c21797f6821a9a

Generated via

aaron@cloudtop:kubernetes (release-1.4 %)$ relnotes \
  --htmlize-md \
  --full \
  --preview \
  --markdown-file=relnotes.md \
  --html-file=relnotes.html \
  v1.3.0..

Then:

  • changelog entries manually removed
  • action required sections copied from CHANGELOG.md 1.4.0-alpha and 1.4.0-beta releases
  • visited action required PR's, pinged authors/assignees if action unclear or possibly no longer relevant
  • visted issues/PR's referenced in known issues accumulator PR, added to Known Issues
  • scraped feature info from a feature-owner-maintained spreadsheet
  • took a best guess at "major themes", solicited and incorporated feedback
  • manually visit docs PR's and translated to staged docs links

if you're being /cc'ed here it's because I've been told you have something to finish, or know who to ask to finish it

if you haven't found any typos in this, somebody tell mavis beacon

/cc @pwittrock @foxish @matchstick @quinton-hoole @devin-donnelly

What needs to be done to finish this:

  • find and eliminate TODO's
    • link and sha256 for the final binary
    • kubeadm docs
    • remaining federation docs

I'm left to believe that's it for my involvement, but do please ping me if this is not the case.


This change is Reviewable

@spiffxp

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@spiffxp

spiffxp Sep 23, 2016

Member

incorporates known issues from #33226

Member

spiffxp commented Sep 23, 2016

incorporates known issues from #33226

@spiffxp

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@spiffxp

spiffxp Sep 23, 2016

Member

incorporates feature information based on kubernetes/features repo and feedback from #32332

Member

spiffxp commented Sep 23, 2016

incorporates feature information based on kubernetes/features repo and feedback from #32332

@pwittrock

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@idvoretskyi

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@idvoretskyi

idvoretskyi Sep 23, 2016

Member

LGTM.

@spiffxp thank you!

Member

idvoretskyi commented Sep 23, 2016

LGTM.

@spiffxp thank you!

@spiffxp

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@dchen1107

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@dchen1107

dchen1107 Sep 23, 2016

Member

cc/ @erictune on one more known backward compatibility issue for init container. Thanks!

Member

dchen1107 commented Sep 23, 2016

cc/ @erictune on one more known backward compatibility issue for init container. Thanks!

foxish added some commits Sep 24, 2016

CHANGELOG.md
+ - [alpha] Container Image Policy allows an access controller to determine whether a pod may be scheduled based on a policy ([docs](http://kubernetes.io/docs/admin/admission-controllers/#imagepolicywebhook)) ([kubernetes/features#59](https://github.com/kubernetes/features/issues/59))
+ - [alpha] Access Review APIs expose authorization engine to external inquiries for delgation, inspection, and debugging ([docs](http://kubernetes.io/docs/admin/authorization/)) ([kubernetes/features#37](https://github.com/kubernetes/features/issues/37))
+- **Cluster Lifecycle**
+ - [alpha] Ensure critical cluster infrastructure pods (Heapster, DNS, etc.) can schedule by evicting regular pods when necessary to make the critical pods schedule. ([docs](http://kubernetes.io/docs/admin/rescheduler/#guaranteed-scheduling-of-critical-add-on-pods)) ([kubernetes/features#62](https://github.com/kubernetes/features/issues/62))

This comment has been minimized.

@foxish

foxish Sep 24, 2016

Member

Introducing a rescheduler component to ensure that critical cluster infrastructure pods (Heapster, DNS, etc.) can schedule by evicting regular pods when necessary.

@foxish

foxish Sep 24, 2016

Member

Introducing a rescheduler component to ensure that critical cluster infrastructure pods (Heapster, DNS, etc.) can schedule by evicting regular pods when necessary.

+- **Apps**
+ - [alpha] Introducing 'ScheduledJobs', which allow running time based Jobs, namely once at a specified time or repeatedly at specified point in time. ([docs](http://kubernetes.io/docs/user-guide/scheduled-jobs/)) ([kubernetes/features#19](https://github.com/kubernetes/features/issues/19))
+- **Auth**
+ - [alpha] Container Image Policy allows an access controller to determine whether a pod may be scheduled based on a policy ([docs](http://kubernetes.io/docs/admin/admission-controllers/#imagepolicywebhook)) ([kubernetes/features#59](https://github.com/kubernetes/features/issues/59))

This comment has been minimized.

@foxish

foxish Sep 24, 2016

Member

s/access/admission/

@foxish

foxish Sep 24, 2016

Member

s/access/admission/

+ - [alpha] Introducing 'ScheduledJobs', which allow running time based Jobs, namely once at a specified time or repeatedly at specified point in time. ([docs](http://kubernetes.io/docs/user-guide/scheduled-jobs/)) ([kubernetes/features#19](https://github.com/kubernetes/features/issues/19))
+- **Auth**
+ - [alpha] Container Image Policy allows an access controller to determine whether a pod may be scheduled based on a policy ([docs](http://kubernetes.io/docs/admin/admission-controllers/#imagepolicywebhook)) ([kubernetes/features#59](https://github.com/kubernetes/features/issues/59))
+ - [alpha] Access Review APIs expose authorization engine to external inquiries for delegation, inspection, and debugging ([docs](http://kubernetes.io/docs/admin/authorization/)) ([kubernetes/features#37](https://github.com/kubernetes/features/issues/37))

This comment has been minimized.

@foxish

foxish Sep 24, 2016

Member

API Server endpoints to perform access control checks and subject access checks without direct knowledge of the backing authorization engine.

(is there a clearer description than "subject access checks"?) cc @erictune

@foxish

foxish Sep 24, 2016

Member

API Server endpoints to perform access control checks and subject access checks without direct knowledge of the backing authorization engine.

(is there a clearer description than "subject access checks"?) cc @erictune

@dchen1107

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@dchen1107

dchen1107 Sep 24, 2016

Member

Can we include supported runtime information here? Something like this:

"The following versions of Docker Engine are supported - v1.10 (#19720), v1.11(#23397) and v1.12(#28698). v1.12 is validated through the automated framework. Although v1.9 is still compatible, we recommend upgrading to one of the supported versions. All prior versions of docker will not be supported." cc/ @Random-Liu @matchstick

Member

dchen1107 commented Sep 24, 2016

Can we include supported runtime information here? Something like this:

"The following versions of Docker Engine are supported - v1.10 (#19720), v1.11(#23397) and v1.12(#28698). v1.12 is validated through the automated framework. Although v1.9 is still compatible, we recommend upgrading to one of the supported versions. All prior versions of docker will not be supported." cc/ @Random-Liu @matchstick

@dchen1107

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@dchen1107

dchen1107 Sep 24, 2016

Member

cc/ @philips Any changes from rkt side? Like the support version and known issue? Or just simply include what we had from 1.3 release?

Member

dchen1107 commented Sep 24, 2016

cc/ @philips Any changes from rkt side? Like the support version and known issue? Or just simply include what we had from 1.3 release?

+
+## Action Required Before Upgrading
+
+- If you are using Kubernetes to manage `docker` containers, please be aware Kubernetes has been validated to work with docker 1.9.1, docker 1.11.2 (#23397), and docker 1.12.0 (#28698)

This comment has been minimized.

@spiffxp

spiffxp Sep 24, 2016

Member

@dchen1107 docker engine info is here, it's definitely missing some of your info... should it be pulled out elsewhere?

@spiffxp

spiffxp Sep 24, 2016

Member

@dchen1107 docker engine info is here, it's definitely missing some of your info... should it be pulled out elsewhere?

This comment has been minimized.

@dchen1107

dchen1107 Sep 24, 2016

Member

I am ok to include docker engine info here. But please include v1.10 since openshift might still use that version here.

Then we can include each docker version's known issue separately in known issue above. Thanks!

@dchen1107

dchen1107 Sep 24, 2016

Member

I am ok to include docker engine info here. But please include v1.10 since openshift might still use that version here.

Then we can include each docker version's known issue separately in known issue above. Thanks!

@pwittrock

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@pwittrock

pwittrock Sep 24, 2016

Member

@foxish @spiffxp @dchen1107

Aaron this looks awesome thanks.

Anirudh + Dawn thanks for doing a review pass.

Can we merge this now? If needed we can do follow up PRs, but I would like to close the book on this so there are no blockers headed into the weekend.

Member

pwittrock commented Sep 24, 2016

@foxish @spiffxp @dchen1107

Aaron this looks awesome thanks.

Anirudh + Dawn thanks for doing a review pass.

Can we merge this now? If needed we can do follow up PRs, but I would like to close the book on this so there are no blockers headed into the weekend.

@erictune

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@erictune

erictune Sep 24, 2016

Member

I agree we should merge now. I will send PR for my follow up comments.

Member

erictune commented Sep 24, 2016

I agree we should merge now. I will send PR for my follow up comments.

@dchen1107

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@dchen1107

dchen1107 Sep 24, 2016

Member

I had a couple of comments, but agreed that we should merge this as is now. I can send PR to address my comments. Thanks!

Member

dchen1107 commented Sep 24, 2016

I had a couple of comments, but agreed that we should merge this as is now. I can send PR to address my comments. Thanks!

@k8s-ci-robot

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@k8s-ci-robot

k8s-ci-robot Sep 24, 2016

Collaborator

Jenkins GCI Kubemark GCE e2e failed for commit cb732e2. Full PR test history.

The magic incantation to run this job again is @k8s-bot kubemark gci e2e test this. Please help us cut down flakes by linking to an open flake issue when you hit one in your PR.

Collaborator

k8s-ci-robot commented Sep 24, 2016

Jenkins GCI Kubemark GCE e2e failed for commit cb732e2. Full PR test history.

The magic incantation to run this job again is @k8s-bot kubemark gci e2e test this. Please help us cut down flakes by linking to an open flake issue when you hit one in your PR.

@erictune erictune merged commit a21e047 into kubernetes:master Sep 24, 2016

1 of 11 checks passed

Jenkins GCI Kubemark GCE e2e Build failed.
Details
Jenkins GCE Node e2e Build started sha1 is merged.
Details
Jenkins GCE e2e Build started.
Details
Jenkins GCI GCE e2e Build started.
Details
Jenkins GCI GKE smoke e2e Build started.
Details
Jenkins GKE smoke e2e Build started.
Details
Jenkins Kubemark GCE e2e Build started.
Details
Jenkins unit/integration Build started.
Details
Jenkins verification Build started.
Details
Submit Queue Github CI tests are not green.
Details
cla/google All necessary CLAs are signed
@erictune

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@erictune

erictune Sep 24, 2016

Member

IIUC, we will keep editing these until it is time to release 1.4.0
Then I don't know what the 1.4.0 CHANGELOG.md is going to look like, but we will find out I guess.

Member

erictune commented Sep 24, 2016

IIUC, we will keep editing these until it is time to release 1.4.0
Then I don't know what the 1.4.0 CHANGELOG.md is going to look like, but we will find out I guess.

@spiffxp

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@spiffxp

spiffxp Sep 24, 2016

Member

thanks all

Member

spiffxp commented Sep 24, 2016

thanks all

@spiffxp spiffxp deleted the spiffxp:v1.4.0-release-notes branch Sep 24, 2016

@fejta

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@fejta

fejta Sep 24, 2016

Contributor

@erictune @pwittrock this broke the submit queue

Contributor

fejta commented Sep 24, 2016

@erictune @pwittrock this broke the submit queue

@foxish

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@foxish

foxish Sep 24, 2016

Member

@fejta @pwittrock submitted a fix after this, #33418

Member

foxish commented Sep 24, 2016

@fejta @pwittrock submitted a fix after this, #33418

@fejta

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@fejta

fejta Sep 24, 2016

Contributor

Sweet thanks!

Contributor

fejta commented Sep 24, 2016

Sweet thanks!

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