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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Bug 1877693: dnsrecords specify recordTTL as 30 but the value is nul… #491

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Nov 19, 2020
Merged

Bug 1877693: dnsrecords specify recordTTL as 30 but the value is nul… #491

merged 1 commit into from Nov 19, 2020

Conversation

candita
Copy link
Contributor

@candita candita commented Nov 16, 2020

Bug 1877693 - dnsrecords specify recordTTL as 30 but the value is null in AWS Route 53. Per AWS API contract, Alias targets may not contain TTL, only CNAME may contain TTL. See #454 (comment). Documenting this behavior.

sgreene570
sgreene570 reviewed Nov 17, 2020
View reviewed changes
pkg/dns/aws/dns.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@sgreene570
Copy link
Contributor

sgreene570 commented Nov 17, 2020 •
edited

By the way, the bugzilla PR automation explicitly expects the PR title to contain the following substring:
Bug xxxxx: Instead of Bug xxxxx -
Using the colon instead of the - will cause the bugzilla bot to link the mentioned bug to this PR 😃

@candita candita marked this pull request as draft November 17, 2020 17:44
@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. label Nov 17, 2020
@candita candita changed the title Bug 1877693 - dnsrecords specify recordTTL as 30 but the value is nul… Bug 1877693: dnsrecords specify recordTTL as 30 but the value is nul… Nov 17, 2020
@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added bugzilla/severity-medium Referenced Bugzilla bug's severity is medium for the branch this PR is targeting. bugzilla/valid-bug Indicates that a referenced Bugzilla bug is valid for the branch this PR is targeting. labels Nov 17, 2020
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

@candita: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 1877693, which is valid. The bug has been updated to refer to the pull request using the external bug tracker.

3 validation(s) were run on this bug
  • bug is open, matching expected state (open)
  • bug target release (4.7.0) matches configured target release for branch (4.7.0)
  • bug is in the state POST, which is one of the valid states (NEW, ASSIGNED, ON_DEV, POST, POST)

In response to this:

Bug 1877693: dnsrecords specify recordTTL as 30 but the value is nul…

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.

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Nov 17, 2020
@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot mentioned this pull request Nov 17, 2020
Merged
@candita candita force-pushed the BZ-1877693 branch 2 times, most recently from 55f2b93 to 3d145eb Compare November 17, 2020 20:00
@candita candita marked this pull request as ready for review November 17, 2020 20:08
@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot removed the do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. label Nov 17, 2020
@Miciah
Copy link
Contributor

Miciah commented Nov 17, 2020

There should be changes under vendor/github.com/openshift/api/. Try running GO111MODULE=on GOFLAGS=-mod=vendor go mod vendor.

@Miciah
Copy link
Contributor

Miciah commented Nov 17, 2020

/lgtm

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Nov 17, 2020
@sgreene570
Copy link
Contributor

sgreene570 commented Nov 17, 2020 •
edited

@Miciah I think the openshift/api bump introduces unit test breakages resultant of openshift/api#776

@Miciah
Copy link
Contributor

Miciah commented Nov 17, 2020 •
edited

@Miciah I think the openshift/api bump introduces unit test breakages resultant of openshift/api#776

Indeed.

/hold

@candita, do you want to add a commit to fix the unit tests? If you prefer, I can make a separate PR to fix the unit tests, and then you can rebase this PR.

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. label Nov 17, 2020
@candita
Copy link
Contributor Author

candita commented Nov 17, 2020

@Miciah sure, I will add the unit test changes.

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot removed the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Nov 17, 2020
@Miciah
Copy link
Contributor

Miciah commented Nov 18, 2020

/lgtm

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Nov 18, 2020
@candita
Copy link
Contributor Author

candita commented Nov 18, 2020

/remove do-not-merge/hold

@candita
Copy link
Contributor Author

candita commented Nov 18, 2020

/hold cancel

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot removed the do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. label Nov 18, 2020
@candita
Copy link
Contributor Author

candita commented Nov 18, 2020

/retest

@Miciah
Copy link
Contributor

Miciah commented Nov 18, 2020

/test e2e-upgrade

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest

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

2 similar comments
@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest

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

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest

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

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot removed the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Nov 18, 2020
@Miciah
Copy link
Contributor

Miciah commented Nov 18, 2020

Can you rebase and rerun make generate? (We generally don't use merge commits in PRs.)

@candita
Copy link
Contributor Author

candita commented Nov 18, 2020

Can you rebase and rerun make generate? (We generally don't use merge commits in PRs.)

Will do.

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Nov 18, 2020
@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot removed the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Nov 18, 2020
@candita
Copy link
Contributor Author

candita commented Nov 18, 2020

/retest

@sgreene570
Copy link
Contributor

/lgtm

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Nov 18, 2020
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: candita, Miciah, sgreene570

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 [Miciah,candita,sgreene570]

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

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest

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

1 similar comment
@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest

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

@openshift-merge-robot openshift-merge-robot merged commit e20d3c9 into openshift:master Nov 19, 2020
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

@candita: All pull requests linked via external trackers have merged:

Bugzilla bug 1877693 has been moved to the MODIFIED state.

In response to this:

Bug 1877693: dnsrecords specify recordTTL as 30 but the value is nul…

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.

@candita candita deleted the BZ-1877693 branch November 19, 2020 15:56
@sgreene570
Copy link
Contributor

/bugzilla refresh

@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

@sgreene570: Bugzilla bug 1877693 is in an unrecognized state (MODIFIED) and will not be moved to the MODIFIED state.

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.

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

@Miciah Miciah Miciah left review comments

@sgreene570 sgreene570 sgreene570 left review comments

@ironcladlou ironcladlou Awaiting requested review from ironcladlou

Assignees

@Miciah Miciah

@sgreene570 sgreene570

Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. bugzilla/severity-medium Referenced Bugzilla bug's severity is medium for the branch this PR is targeting. bugzilla/valid-bug Indicates that a referenced Bugzilla bug is valid for the branch this PR is targeting. lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet
6 participants
@candita @sgreene570 @openshift-ci-robot @Miciah @openshift-bot @openshift-merge-robot