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.

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

sig-release: Blockade changes to critical k/release tooling #13328

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Jul 9, 2019

Conversation

@justaugustus
Copy link
Member

commented Jul 4, 2019

ref: kubernetes/release#816
Signed-off-by: Stephen Augustus saugustus@vmware.com

@justaugustus

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member Author

commented Jul 4, 2019

/hold
(I think I have a few more patterns to add)

@justaugustus justaugustus force-pushed the justaugustus:k-r-blockades branch from e6f226f to db5b243 Jul 4, 2019

@justaugustus

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member Author

commented Jul 4, 2019

Done.
/hold cancel

@justaugustus

This comment has been minimized.

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot requested a review from nikhita Jul 4, 2019

@cblecker

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

commented Jul 5, 2019

/hold

Why wouldn't we just do this with OWNERS files?

@justaugustus

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member Author

commented Jul 5, 2019

@cblecker -- This is essentially saying I want explicit approval from a repo admin (SIG Release Chair) before changing one of these tools. We have top-level approvers in k/release that I still want to be able to approve other changes without impact.

As the tools are scattered across the repo, I need an extra gate to protect them and I heard that required_reviewers doesn't actually get respected?
Some of this could probably be obviated if all of the tools were in a single (or a few) subdirectories with no_parent_owners: true, but at this moment, I don't have a clear picture of what could break if I move things around.

@alvaroaleman

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

commented Jul 7, 2019

/uncc

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot removed the request for review from alvaroaleman Jul 7, 2019

@cjwagner

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

commented Jul 8, 2019

Sounds like using blockade is most appropriate here, but just as an FYI Tide support blocking merge to entire branches or repos using a merge blocking issue: https://github.com/kubernetes/test-infra/blob/master/prow/cmd/tide/config.md#merge-blocker-issues

blocker_label: tide/merge-blocker

@justaugustus

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member Author

commented Jul 8, 2019

@cjwagner -- Whoa, that's cool. Thanks for the tip! Agreed that blockade might still be the right path here.

@fejta

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented Jul 8, 2019

/unassign
/assign @cjwagner

No concerns with the general intent

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot assigned cjwagner and unassigned fejta Jul 8, 2019

@cblecker

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

commented Jul 8, 2019

I started writing something up and then apparently closed the tab 🤦‍♂ .

Basically, I still feel like this is an anti-pattern (blockading files, and then manually removing the label each time you need to change them). It provides a different contributing structure than normal, and requires manual intervention.

I could be convinced to be okay with this for a limited period of time to help stabilize the situation (30d?). Ultimately though, reorganizing files (either move the scripts all together, or move the other stuff all together) and then using OWNERS files should be the goal.

@justaugustus

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member Author

commented Jul 8, 2019

@cblecker -- yep, the intent for the blockade is definitely temporary!
I want to rearrange the tools but I don't feel comfortable doing so until we can identify where they're used and have jobs to protect changes to them. Much of that work is already in flight. :)

@cblecker

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

commented Jul 9, 2019

What's a reasonable time frame for this work?

sig-release: Blockade changes to critical k/release tooling
Signed-off-by: Stephen Augustus <saugustus@vmware.com>

@justaugustus justaugustus force-pushed the justaugustus:k-r-blockades branch from db5b243 to 38a9890 Jul 9, 2019

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added size/S and removed size/XS labels Jul 9, 2019

@justaugustus

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member Author

commented Jul 9, 2019

Spoke to @cblecker on Slack.
Setting a deadline for 8/8/19 and added a comment to remove the blockade afterwards.

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the lgtm label Jul 9, 2019

@k8s-ci-robot

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented Jul 9, 2019

LGTM label has been added.

Git tree hash: c47a292f5d6f4bab026f0f7c6713822a3d3660a0

@k8s-ci-robot

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented Jul 9, 2019

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: cblecker, justaugustus

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

@justaugustus

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member Author

commented Jul 9, 2019

Thanks again, Christoph!
/hold cancel

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot merged commit 973a6e6 into kubernetes:master Jul 9, 2019

6 checks passed

cla/linuxfoundation justaugustus authorized
Details
pull-test-infra-bazel Job succeeded.
Details
pull-test-infra-gubernator Skipped.
pull-test-infra-verify-file-perms Job succeeded.
Details
pull-test-infra-yamllint Job succeeded.
Details
tide In merge pool.
Details
@k8s-ci-robot

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented Jul 9, 2019

@justaugustus: Updated the plugins configmap in namespace default using the following files:

  • key plugins.yaml using file prow/plugins.yaml

In response to this:

ref: kubernetes/release#816
Signed-off-by: Stephen Augustus saugustus@vmware.com

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.

- repos:
- kubernetes/release
blockregexps:
- ^anago|branchff|build\/|changelog-update|compile-release-tools|debian\/|find_green_build|gcb\/|gcbmgr|lib\/|prin|push-build.sh|release-notify|relnotes|rpm\/

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
@BenTheElder

BenTheElder Jul 12, 2019

Member

why not .*? :P

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
You can’t perform that action at this time.