-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 557
NE-1871: Promote GatewayAPI to Tech Preview #2081
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
NE-1871: Promote GatewayAPI to Tech Preview #2081
Conversation
Hello @rfredette! Some important instructions when contributing to openshift/api: |
@rfredette: This pull request references NE-1871 which is a valid jira issue. Warning: The referenced jira issue has an invalid target version for the target branch this PR targets: expected the story to target the "4.18.0" version, but no target version was set. In response to this: 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 openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository. |
test failures seem unrelated |
@rfredette: This pull request references NE-1871 which is a valid jira issue. Warning: The referenced jira issue has an invalid target version for the target branch this PR targets: expected the story to target the "4.18.0" version, but no target version was set. In response to this:
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 openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository. |
/jira refresh |
@rfredette: This pull request references NE-1871 which is a valid jira issue. In response to this:
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 openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository. |
Until the Gateway API feature is ready to be considered tech preview: |
/assign @gcs278 |
@gcs278 @rfredette based on our team meeting this morning, we would like to pursue merging this so Gateway API integration can get the CI exercise that a TechPreview cluster gets, on all platforms. Can you please unhold and review so we can make that happen? |
@candita maybe I misunderstood, but I thought the decision was to wait until 4.19 branch opens to bump the feature gate to Tech Preview. In 4.19, we'd would do Dev Preview --> Tech Preview --> GA, all in the same development cycle. |
No, it's better for us to do this without having to backport it after branch cut if possible. |
@candita @rfredette I think we are ready to proceed with this PR now that 4.18 branch cut has happened based on our conversation in slack. We'll have to wait until after the holidays to merge, but following up here before I forget. |
b9afb68
to
12d1e65
Compare
/unhold |
@rfredette LGTM, but the one thing you should consider is that the e2e-aws-gatewayapi presubmit job will become redundant after this PR merging since e2e-aws-operator-techpreview should automatically start running the GWAPI tests. Might be good to raise another PR that removes it, or consult with the team about removing it. /lgtm |
@JoelSpeed Right now they will be deployed lazily when a GatewayClass is created. Once we move to GA, that's a different story. cc @Miciah |
Yes. In e2e-aws-ovn-techpreview: I0113 19:01:40.454720 1 event.go:377] Event(v1.ObjectReference{Kind:"Deployment", Namespace:"openshift-ingress-operator", Name:"ingress-operator", UID:"", APIVersion:"apps/v1", ResourceVersion:"", FieldPath:""}): type: 'Normal' reason: 'FeatureGatesInitialized' FeatureGates updated to featuregates.Features{Enabled:[]v1.FeatureGateName{"AWSClusterHostedDNS", "AWSEFSDriverVolumeMetrics", "AdditionalRoutingCapabilities", "AdminNetworkPolicy", "AlibabaPlatform", "AutomatedEtcdBackup", "AzureWorkloadIdentity", "BareMetalLoadBalancer", "BootcNodeManagement", "BuildCSIVolumes", "CPMSMachineNamePrefix", "ChunkSizeMiB", "CloudDualStackNodeIPs", "ClusterMonitoringConfig", "ConsolePluginContentSecurityPolicy", "DNSNameResolver", "DisableKubeletCloudCredentialProviders", "DynamicResourceAllocation", "EtcdBackendQuota", "Example", "ExternalOIDC", "GCPClusterHostedDNS", "GCPLabelsTags", and in e2e-aws-serial-techpreview: I0113 19:03:33.038269 1 event.go:377] Event(v1.ObjectReference{Kind:"Deployment", Namespace:"openshift-ingress-operator", Name:"ingress-operator", UID:"", APIVersion:"apps/v1", ResourceVersion:"", FieldPath:""}): type: 'Normal' reason: 'FeatureGatesInitialized' FeatureGates updated to featuregates.Features{Enabled:[]v1.FeatureGateName{"AWSClusterHostedDNS", "AWSEFSDriverVolumeMetrics", "AdditionalRoutingCapabilities", "AdminNetworkPolicy", "AlibabaPlatform", "AutomatedEtcdBackup", "AzureWorkloadIdentity", "BareMetalLoadBalancer", "BootcNodeManagement", "BuildCSIVolumes", "CPMSMachineNamePrefix", "ChunkSizeMiB", "CloudDualStackNodeIPs", "ClusterMonitoringConfig", "ConsolePluginContentSecurityPolicy", "DNSNameResolver", "DisableKubeletCloudCredentialProviders", "DynamicResourceAllocation", "EtcdBackendQuota", "Example", "ExternalOIDC", "GCPClusterHostedDNS", "GCPLabelsTags", |
12d1e65
to
c9ae927
Compare
/lgtm |
/cancel lgtm |
/test integration |
I can see the gateway classes installed in the techpreview jobs /hold @candita you cancelled the LGTM, is there something making you hesitant from merging this? |
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: candita, gcs278, JoelSpeed, rfredette 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 |
@JoelSpeed it was just the failing prow tests that made me withdraw my /lgtm. They are not required, so let's go ahead. /unhold |
/retest |
1 similar comment
/retest |
Tested using pre-merge image
It take some time after the route creation to get curl to that route. |
@rfredette: This pull request references NE-1871 which is a valid jira issue. Warning: The referenced jira issue has an invalid target version for the target branch this PR targets: expected the story to target either version "4.19." or "openshift-4.19.", but it targets "4.18.0" instead. In response to this:
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 openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository. |
This is a critical dependency for Gateway API feature work. /label acknowledge-critical-fixes-only |
/jira refresh |
@candita: This pull request references NE-1871 which is a valid jira issue. In response to this:
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 openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository. |
@rfredette: all tests passed! Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard. 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-sigs/prow repository. I understand the commands that are listed here. |
[ART PR BUILD NOTIFIER] Distgit: ose-cluster-config-api |
Enhancement: Gateway API with Cluster Ingress Operator