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

UX improvement for preflight check for external etcd client certificates #64269

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
May 30, 2018
Merged

UX improvement for preflight check for external etcd client certificates #64269

merged 1 commit into from
May 30, 2018

Conversation

kad
Copy link
Member

@kad kad commented May 24, 2018

What this PR does / why we need it:
UX improvement for preflight check for external etcd client certificates

By using same preflight check label for all etcd client certificates, it will
allow user to use single identifier, and as result shorter command line
arguments to kubeadm, in case multiple issues found with those files.

Fixes:

Which issue(s) this PR fixes (optional, in fixes #<issue number>(, fixes #<issue_number>, ...) format, will close the issue(s) when PR gets merged):
Fixes kubernetes/kubeadm#834

Special notes for your reviewer:

Release note:

Label ExternalEtcdClientCertificates can be used for ignoring all preflight check issues related to client certificate files for external etcd.

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added release-note Denotes a PR that will be considered when it comes time to generate release notes. size/XS Denotes a PR that changes 0-9 lines, ignoring generated files. cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. labels May 24, 2018
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot requested review from dixudx and luxas May 24, 2018 15:55
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added area/kubeadm sig/cluster-lifecycle Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Cluster Lifecycle. needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. labels May 24, 2018
@kad
UX improvement for preflight check for external etcd client certificates
c798dfc 
By using same preflight check label for all etcd client certificates, it will
allow user to use single identifier, and as result shorter command line
arguments to kubeadm, in case multiple issues found with those files.

Fixes: kubernetes/kubeadm#834
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot removed the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label May 28, 2018
dixudx
dixudx reviewed May 30, 2018
View reviewed changes
cmd/kubeadm/app/preflight/checks.go
@@ -892,13 +892,13 @@ func RunInitMasterChecks(execer utilsexec.Interface, cfg *kubeadmapi.MasterConfi
if cfg.Etcd.External != nil {
// Only check etcd version when external endpoints are specified
if cfg.Etcd.External.CAFile != "" {
checks = append(checks, FileExistingCheck{Path: cfg.Etcd.External.CAFile})
checks = append(checks, FileExistingCheck{Path: cfg.Etcd.External.CAFile, Label: "ExternalEtcdClientCertificates"})
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Better have difference labels to avoid confusions. WDYT?

Copy link
Member Author

@kad kad May 30, 2018 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

It was original reason discussed in kubernetes/website#8317: for user in case some issue with client certificates to specify one type in --ignore-preflight-errors rather than 3 or 4 different. Otherwise user would do --ignore-preflight-errors=all. Exact error message(s) will show which out of 3 files are missing, but for ignoring that issue, one single label can be utilized.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Okay, fair enough. Thanks!

@luxas luxas self-assigned this May 30, 2018
luxas
luxas approved these changes May 30, 2018
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@luxas luxas left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

/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 May 30, 2018
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: kad, luxas

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 30, 2018
@luxas luxas added this to the v1.11 milestone May 30, 2018
@luxas luxas added kind/bug Categorizes issue or PR as related to a bug. priority/important-soon Must be staffed and worked on either currently, or very soon, ideally in time for the next release. status/approved-for-milestone labels May 30, 2018
@k8s-github-robot
Copy link

[MILESTONENOTIFIER] Milestone Pull Request: Up-to-date for process

@kad @luxas

Pull Request Labels
  • sig/cluster-lifecycle: Pull Request will be escalated to these SIGs if needed.
  • priority/important-soon: Escalate to the pull request owners and SIG owner; move out of milestone after several unsuccessful escalation attempts.
  • kind/bug: Fixes a bug discovered during the current release.
Help

@kad
Copy link
Member Author

kad commented May 30, 2018

/test pull-kubernetes-integration

@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 comment for consistent failures.

@k8s-github-robot
Copy link

Automatic merge from submit-queue (batch tested with PRs 64318, 64269, 64438, 64516, 64311). If you want to cherry-pick this change to another branch, please follow the instructions here.

@k8s-github-robot k8s-github-robot merged commit dd13969 into kubernetes:master May 30, 2018
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@dixudx dixudx dixudx left review comments

@luxas luxas luxas approved these changes

Assignees

@luxas luxas

Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. area/kubeadm cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. kind/bug Categorizes issue or PR as related to a bug. lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. priority/important-soon Must be staffed and worked on either currently, or very soon, ideally in time for the next release. release-note Denotes a PR that will be considered when it comes time to generate release notes. sig/cluster-lifecycle Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Cluster Lifecycle. size/XS Denotes a PR that changes 0-9 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
v1.11
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

UX improvement for FileExistingCheck
6 participants
@kad @k8s-ci-robot @k8s-github-robot @fejta-bot @luxas @dixudx