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

Rename '--experimental-encryption-provider-config' to '--encryption-provider-config' #71206

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Nov 21, 2018

Conversation

@stlaz
Copy link
Contributor

stlaz commented Nov 19, 2018

This change renames the '--experimental-encryption-provider-config' flag to '--encryption-provider-config'. The old flag is accepted but generates a warning.

In 1.14, we will drop support for '--experimental-encryption-provider-config' entirely.

What type of PR is this?
/kind api-change

What this PR does / why we need it:
This PR follows up on the EncryptionConfiguration alpha->stable move from #67383

Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
Fixes #61420

Special notes for your reviewer:
This is a rebase of original PR #61592

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?:

API server flag `--experimental-encryption-provider-config` was renamed to `--encryption-provider-config`. The old flag is accepted with a warning but will be removed in 1.14.
@k8s-ci-robot

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

k8s-ci-robot commented Nov 19, 2018

Hi @stlaz. 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 /ok-to-test on its own line. Until that is done, I will not automatically test new commits in this PR, but the usual testing commands by org members will still work. Regular contributors should join the org to skip this step.

Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the ok-to-test label.

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.

@liggitt

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

liggitt commented Nov 19, 2018

/ok-to-test

@dims

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

dims commented Nov 19, 2018

This is the alternative to #61592, 61592 was stuck behind other PRs and in rebase-hell. This does not alter the logic in any way or drop support for the older option. This just marks the older one as deprecated and adds a new option that exercises the same code as the old option

/priority critical-urgent
/milestone v1.13

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added this to the v1.13 milestone Nov 19, 2018

@dims

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

dims commented Nov 19, 2018

LGTM!

@liggitt

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

liggitt commented Nov 19, 2018

@stlaz stlaz force-pushed the stlaz:enc_config_opt branch from 815ed49 to 21c1bb8 Nov 19, 2018

kubeapiserver: rename '--experimental-encryption-provider-config' to …
…'--encryption-provider-config'.

This change renames the '--experimental-encryption-provider-config'
flag to '--encryption-provider-config'. The old flag is accepted but
generates a warning.

In 1.14, we will drop support for '--experimental-encryption-provider-config'
entirely.

Co-authored-by: Stanislav Laznicka <slaznick@redhat.com>
@stlaz

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

stlaz commented Nov 19, 2018

there's a gofmt error: https://gubernator.k8s.io/build/kubernetes-jenkins/pr-logs/pull/71206/pull-kubernetes-verify/114526/

Weird, my IDE started doing that. Fixed with vim...

@liggitt

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

liggitt commented Nov 19, 2018

Weird, my IDE started doing that

probably a different go version (gofmt changed how indentation worked in 1.11, iirc)

@stlaz

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

stlaz commented Nov 19, 2018

/retest

@smarterclayton

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

smarterclayton commented Nov 20, 2018

I would approve this given the discussions I’ve been in. Is there any reason not to promote, other than the timing concern?

@dims

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

dims commented Nov 20, 2018

@smarterclayton i am not aware of any (hopefully @liggitt agrees)

@liggitt

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

liggitt commented Nov 20, 2018

I would approve this given the discussions I’ve been in. Is there any reason not to promote, other than the timing concern?

no reason I'm aware of. stabilizing the config file format was the only blocker, and that has been resolved.

@liggitt

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

liggitt commented Nov 20, 2018

/approve

@stlaz

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

stlaz commented Nov 20, 2018

Many thanks for LGTM and approval 🙂 Maybe we could get @mikedanese for the cluster/gce approval here?

@smarterclayton

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

smarterclayton commented Nov 20, 2018

/approve

@k8s-ci-robot

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

k8s-ci-robot commented Nov 20, 2018

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: liggitt, smarterclayton, stlaz

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

@dims

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

dims commented Nov 20, 2018

/retest

2 similar comments
@stlaz

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

stlaz commented Nov 20, 2018

/retest

@nikopen

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

nikopen commented Nov 20, 2018

/retest

@nikopen

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

nikopen commented Nov 20, 2018

maybe this is an actual gke error / using the flag in some of their scripts?

@fejta-bot

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

fejta-bot commented Nov 20, 2018

/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.

@liggitt

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

liggitt commented Nov 20, 2018

maybe this is an actual gke error / using the flag in some of their scripts?

both the old and new flag are still accepted. the same gke error appears in other PR jobs: https://gubernator.k8s.io/build/kubernetes-jenkins/pr-logs/pull/71124/pull-kubernetes-e2e-gke/3445/

@enj

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

enj commented Nov 21, 2018

/retest

@AishSundar

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

AishSundar commented Nov 21, 2018

/test pull-kubernetes-e2e-gke

@AishSundar

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

AishSundar commented Nov 21, 2018

/cc @loburm @mikedanese

@loburm we have a couple of PRs failing on pull-kubernetes-e2e-gke consistently today. Can you please help take a look to see if there's a wider GKE issue. this is critical PR blocked on getting into 1.13 release.

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot requested review from loburm and mikedanese Nov 21, 2018

@fejta-bot

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

fejta-bot commented Nov 21, 2018

/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.

@stlaz

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

stlaz commented Nov 21, 2018

/retest

@fejta-bot

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

fejta-bot commented Nov 21, 2018

/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.

@stlaz

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

stlaz commented Nov 21, 2018

/retest

@fejta-bot

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

fejta-bot commented Nov 21, 2018

/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.

@nikopen

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

nikopen commented Nov 21, 2018

/retest

1 similar comment
@mikedanese

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

mikedanese commented Nov 21, 2018

/retest

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot merged commit 2b0212d into kubernetes:master Nov 21, 2018

18 checks passed

cla/linuxfoundation marrrvin authorized
Details
pull-kubernetes-bazel-build Job succeeded.
Details
pull-kubernetes-bazel-test Job succeeded.
Details
pull-kubernetes-cross Skipped
pull-kubernetes-e2e-gce Job succeeded.
Details
pull-kubernetes-e2e-gce-100-performance Job succeeded.
Details
pull-kubernetes-e2e-gce-device-plugin-gpu Job succeeded.
Details
pull-kubernetes-e2e-gke Job succeeded.
Details
pull-kubernetes-e2e-kops-aws Job succeeded.
Details
pull-kubernetes-e2e-kubeadm-gce Skipped
pull-kubernetes-integration Job succeeded.
Details
pull-kubernetes-kubemark-e2e-gce-big Job succeeded.
Details
pull-kubernetes-local-e2e Skipped
pull-kubernetes-local-e2e-containerized Skipped
pull-kubernetes-node-e2e Job succeeded.
Details
pull-kubernetes-typecheck Job succeeded.
Details
pull-kubernetes-verify Job succeeded.
Details
tide In merge pool.
Details
@dims

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

dims commented Nov 27, 2018

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