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

minor consistency update for node's well known labels #2605

Merged
merged 2 commits into from Mar 18, 2024

Conversation

ksdpmx
Copy link
Contributor

@ksdpmx ksdpmx commented Mar 4, 2024

What does this PR change?

  • minor consistency update for node's well known labels
  • minor typo fix

Does this PR relate to any other PRs?

  • no

How will this PR impact users?

  • no impact

Does this PR address any GitHub or Zendesk issues?

How was this PR tested?

  • go test

Does this PR require changes to documentation?

  • no change

Have you labeled this PR and its corresponding Issue as "next release" if it should be part of the next OpenCost release? If not, why not?

Copy link

vercel bot commented Mar 4, 2024

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎

Name Status Preview Comments Updated (UTC)
opencost ✅ Ready (Inspect) Visit Preview 💬 Add feedback Mar 18, 2024 9:03pm

Signed-off-by: jasonz <ksdpmx@gmail.com>
@mattray
Copy link
Collaborator

mattray commented Mar 5, 2024

Thanks for the PR @ksdpmx! Any @opencost/opencost-maintainers want to weigh in on any reason not to merge this?

@mbolt35
Copy link
Contributor

mbolt35 commented Mar 5, 2024

Thanks for the contribution @ksdpmx !

For other reviewers, here are the values for these consts:

LabelInstanceType       = "beta.kubernetes.io/instance-type"
LabelInstanceTypeStable = "node.kubernetes.io/instance-type"

It looks like some of the test cases were updated to use the correct up to date values, but I think we intended to mix legacy constants and current stable constants in order to test the compatibility layer. I think having up to date constant values is probably fine and shouldn't block this PR. Would love at least one other maintainer to verify!

Copy link
Contributor

@mbolt35 mbolt35 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This is a great tidy-up PR - would love another reviewer just to verify the test case updates to ensure I'm not missing something.

@mattray mattray added opencost OpenCost issues vs. external/downstream P2 Estimated Priority (P0 is highest, P4 is lowest) kubecost Relevant to Kubecost's downstream project E2 Estimated level of Effort (1 is easiest, 4 is hardest) labels Mar 14, 2024
Copy link

sonarcloud bot commented Mar 18, 2024

@AjayTripathy AjayTripathy merged commit 54dfadc into opencost:develop Mar 18, 2024
7 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
E2 Estimated level of Effort (1 is easiest, 4 is hardest) kubecost Relevant to Kubecost's downstream project needs-follow-up opencost OpenCost issues vs. external/downstream P2 Estimated Priority (P0 is highest, P4 is lowest)
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

5 participants