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 1880307: Fix inconsistent vendoring in vendor/modules.txt #471

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Sep 26, 2020
Merged

Bug 1880307: Fix inconsistent vendoring in vendor/modules.txt #471

merged 1 commit into from Sep 26, 2020

Conversation

jhadvig
Copy link
Member

@jhadvig jhadvig commented Sep 18, 2020

Need to fix this inconsistency due to the failures openshift/release#12006

2020/09/18 14:52:20 Executing test unit
go test  -race ./pkg/... ./cmd/...
go: inconsistent vendoring in /go/src/github.com/openshift/console-operator:
	github.com/openshift/api@v0.0.0-20200429152225-b98a784d8e6d: is explicitly required in go.mod, but vendor/modules.txt indicates github.com/openshift/api@v0.0.0-20200424083944-0422dc17083e
	github.com/openshift/client-go@v0.0.0-20200422192633-6f6c07fc2a70: is explicitly required in go.mod, but vendor/modules.txt indicates github.com/openshift/client-go@v0.0.0-20200326155132-2a6cd50aedd0

/assign @spadgett

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added bugzilla/severity-high Referenced Bugzilla bug's severity is high for the branch this PR is targeting. bugzilla/invalid-bug Indicates that a referenced Bugzilla bug is invalid for the branch this PR is targeting. labels Sep 18, 2020
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

@jhadvig: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 1880307, which is invalid:

  • expected dependent Bugzilla bug 1880369 to be in one of the following states: VERIFIED, RELEASE_PENDING, CLOSED (ERRATA), 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:

Bug 1880307: Fix inconsistent vendoring in vendor/modules.txt

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.

spadgett
spadgett approved these changes Sep 18, 2020
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@spadgett spadgett left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

/lgtm

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

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: jhadvig, spadgett

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

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Sep 18, 2020
@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/bugzilla refresh

Recalculating validity in case the underlying Bugzilla bug has changed.

@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

@openshift-bot: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 1880307, which is invalid:

  • expected dependent Bugzilla bug 1880369 to be in one of the following states: VERIFIED, RELEASE_PENDING, CLOSED (ERRATA), 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.

@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-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/bugzilla refresh

Recalculating validity in case the underlying Bugzilla bug has changed.

@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

@openshift-bot: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 1880307, which is invalid:

  • expected dependent Bugzilla bug 1880369 to be in one of the following states: VERIFIED, RELEASE_PENDING, CLOSED (ERRATA), 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.

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/bugzilla refresh

Recalculating validity in case the underlying Bugzilla bug has changed.

@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

@openshift-bot: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 1880307, which is invalid:

  • expected dependent Bugzilla bug 1880369 to be in one of the following states: VERIFIED, RELEASE_PENDING, CLOSED (ERRATA), 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.

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/bugzilla refresh

Recalculating validity in case the underlying Bugzilla bug has changed.

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added bugzilla/valid-bug Indicates that a referenced Bugzilla bug is valid for the branch this PR is targeting. and removed bugzilla/invalid-bug Indicates that a referenced Bugzilla bug is invalid for the branch this PR is targeting. labels Sep 22, 2020
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

@openshift-bot: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 1880307, 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 (4.5.z) matches configured target release for branch (4.5.z)
  • bug is in the state ASSIGNED, which is one of the valid states (NEW, ASSIGNED, ON_DEV, POST, POST)
  • dependent bug Bugzilla bug 1880369 is in the state VERIFIED, which is one of the valid states (VERIFIED, RELEASE_PENDING, CLOSED (ERRATA))
  • dependent Bugzilla bug 1880369 targets the "4.6.0" release, which is one of the valid target releases: 4.6.0, 4.6.z
  • bug has dependents

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.

@markmc
Copy link

markmc commented Sep 24, 2020

(patch manager) can you explain how this resolves bz #1880307 if it does not include kubernetes/kubernetes#92688 ?

@markmc markmc added the priority/awaiting-more-evidence Lowest priority. Possibly useful, but not yet enough support to actually get it done. label Sep 24, 2020
@jhadvig
Copy link
Member Author

jhadvig commented Sep 24, 2020 •
edited

@markmc based on the https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1880307 bug thats effecting 4.5 version of console-operator we need to use golang in 1.14 version, due to the bump of build-machinery-go pkg. For that reason we need to merge openshift/release#12006 which is failing due to the inconsistent vendoring, that this PR fixes.

@markmc
Copy link

markmc commented Sep 24, 2020

(patch manager) this is an incomplete fix for the linked bz, so the bz should be moved back to ASSIGNED when this PR merges

@markmc markmc added cherry-pick-approved Indicates a cherry-pick PR into a release branch has been approved by the release branch manager. and removed priority/awaiting-more-evidence Lowest priority. Possibly useful, but not yet enough support to actually get it done. labels Sep 24, 2020
@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.

@jhadvig
Copy link
Member Author

jhadvig commented Sep 24, 2020

/test e2e-gcp

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest

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

12 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-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-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-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-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-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.

@jhadvig
Copy link
Member Author

jhadvig commented Sep 25, 2020

/retest

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest

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

4 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-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.

@knobunc
Copy link

knobunc commented Sep 26, 2020

/retest

@openshift-merge-robot openshift-merge-robot merged commit e7f4f66 into openshift:release-4.5 Sep 26, 2020
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

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

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

These pull request must merge or be unlinked from the Bugzilla bug in order for it to move to the next state.

Bugzilla bug 1880307 has not been moved to the MODIFIED state.

In response to this:

Bug 1880307: Fix inconsistent vendoring in vendor/modules.txt

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 mentioned this pull request Oct 7, 2020
Merged
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@spadgett spadgett spadgett approved these changes

Assignees

@spadgett spadgett

Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. bugzilla/severity-high Referenced Bugzilla bug's severity is high 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. cherry-pick-approved Indicates a cherry-pick PR into a release branch has been approved by the release branch manager. 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
7 participants
@jhadvig @openshift-ci-robot @openshift-bot @markmc @knobunc @spadgett @openshift-merge-robot