[release-4.9] Bug 2024751: pod-identity-webhook starts without tls

[sanchezl]

Build with go 1.16.

[openshift-ci]

@sanchezl: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 2024751, which is invalid:

• expected dependent Bugzilla bug 2024613 to be in one of the following states: VERIFIED, RELEASE_PENDING, CLOSED (ERRATA), CLOSED (CURRENTRELEASE), but it is MODIFIED instead

Comment /bugzilla refresh to re-evaluate validity if changes to the Bugzilla bug are made, or edit the title of this pull request to link to a different bug.

In response to this:

[release-4.9] Bug 2024751: pod-identity-webhook starts without tls

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.

[sanchezl]

/assign @joelddiaz

This PR will need to merge in before #423.

[joelddiaz]

/lgtm

[openshift-bot]

/bugzilla refresh

Recalculating validity in case the underlying Bugzilla bug has changed.

[openshift-ci]

@openshift-bot: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 2024751, which is invalid:

• expected dependent Bugzilla bug 2024613 to be in one of the following states: VERIFIED, RELEASE_PENDING, CLOSED (ERRATA), CLOSED (CURRENTRELEASE), but it is ON_QA instead

Comment /bugzilla refresh to re-evaluate validity if changes to the Bugzilla bug are made, or edit the title of this pull request to link to a different bug.

In response to this:

/bugzilla refresh

Recalculating validity in case the underlying Bugzilla bug has changed.

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.

[sanchezl]

/bugzilla refresh

[openshift-ci]

@sanchezl: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 2024751, which is invalid:

• expected dependent Bugzilla bug 2024613 to be in one of the following states: VERIFIED, RELEASE_PENDING, CLOSED (ERRATA), CLOSED (CURRENTRELEASE), but it is ON_QA instead

Comment /bugzilla refresh to re-evaluate validity if changes to the Bugzilla bug are made, or edit the title of this pull request to link to a different bug.

In response to this:

/bugzilla refresh

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.

[sanchezl]

/bugzilla refresh

[openshift-ci]

@sanchezl: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 2024751, which is valid. The bug has been moved to the POST state. The bug has been updated to refer to the pull request using the external bug tracker.

6 validation(s) were run on this bug

• bug is open, matching expected state (open)
• bug target release (4.9.z) matches configured target release for branch (4.9.z)
• bug is in the state NEW, which is one of the valid states (NEW, ASSIGNED, ON_DEV, POST, POST)
• dependent bug Bugzilla bug 2024613 is in the state VERIFIED, which is one of the valid states (VERIFIED, RELEASE_PENDING, CLOSED (ERRATA), CLOSED (CURRENTRELEASE))
• dependent Bugzilla bug 2024613 targets the "4.10.0" release, which is one of the valid target releases: 4.10.0
• bug has dependents

Requesting review from QA contact:
/cc @lwan-wanglin

In response to this:

/bugzilla refresh

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.

[sanchezl]

1. If the Bugzilla associated with the PR has the "FastFix" keyword, the subjective assessment on the issue has already been done and a customer is impacted. These PRs should be prioritized for merge.
   • verified
   • does not apply
2. The bug has significant impact either through severity, reduction in supportability, or number of users affected.
   • verified
   • does not apply
3. For branches that are in the Maintenance lifecycle phase:
   • The bug is a critical fix, no reasonable workaround exists, and a recommendation for upgrade has been ruled out, or
   • The bug is a security related bug
   • Branch not in maintenance mode yet (current release + previous release for 90 days after current GA; everything older is in maintenance)
4. The severity field of the bug must be set to accurately reflect criticality.
   • verified
5. The PR was created with the cherry-pick bot OR the PR’s description is well formed with user-focused release notes that state the bug number, impact, cause, and resolution. Where appropriate, it should also contain information about how a user can identify whether a particular cluster is affected.
   • verified

[joelddiaz]

/label backport-risk-assessed

[jianping-shu]

/label cherry-pick-approved
/label qe-approved
/lgtm

Tested as comment in Bug 2024751.

[openshift-ci]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: jianping-shu, joelddiaz, sanchezl

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:

• OWNERS [joelddiaz]

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

[lwan-wanglin]

/test e2e-upgrade

[openshift-bot]

/retest-required

Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes.

[openshift-ci]

@sanchezl: Some pull requests linked via external trackers have merged:

The following pull requests linked via external trackers have not merged:

• openshift/cloud-credential-operator#423 is open

These pull request must merge or be unlinked from the Bugzilla bug in order for it to move to the next state. Once unlinked, request a bug refresh with /bugzilla refresh.

Bugzilla bug 2024751 has not been moved to the MODIFIED state.

In response to this:

[release-4.9] Bug 2024751: pod-identity-webhook starts without tls

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.