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

[release-4.10] Bug 2054949: Disabling Vault SA based auth for storage class encryption #11064

Conversation

openshift-cherrypick-robot

This is an automated cherry-pick of #10998

/assign GowthamShanmugam

Signed-off-by: Gowtham Shanmugasundaram <gshanmug@redhat.com>
@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Feb 16, 2022

@openshift-cherrypick-robot: Bugzilla bug 2048442 has been cloned as Bugzilla bug 2054949. Retitling PR to link against new bug.
/retitle [release-4.10] Bug 2054949: Disabling Vault SA based auth for storage class encryption

In response to this:

[release-4.10] Bug 2048442: Disabling Vault SA based auth for storage class encryption

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 openshift-ci bot changed the title [release-4.10] Bug 2048442: Disabling Vault SA based auth for storage class encryption [release-4.10] Bug 2054949: Disabling Vault SA based auth for storage class encryption Feb 16, 2022
@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added 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. labels Feb 16, 2022
@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Feb 16, 2022

@openshift-cherrypick-robot: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 2054949, 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 (4.10.0) matches configured target release for branch (4.10.0)
  • bug is in the state NEW, which is one of the valid states (NEW, ASSIGNED, ON_DEV, POST, POST)
  • dependent bug Bugzilla bug 2048442 is in the state ON_QA, which is one of the valid states (MODIFIED, ON_QA, VERIFIED)
  • dependent Bugzilla bug 2048442 targets the "4.11.0" release, which is one of the valid target releases: 4.11.0
  • bug has dependents

Requesting review from QA contact:
/cc @rachael-george

In response to this:

[release-4.10] Bug 2054949: Disabling Vault SA based auth for storage class encryption

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 openshift-ci bot added the component/ceph Related to ceph-storage-plugin label Feb 16, 2022
@GowthamShanmugam
Copy link
Contributor

/bugzilla refresh

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added bugzilla/invalid-bug Indicates that a referenced Bugzilla bug is invalid for the branch this PR is targeting. and removed bugzilla/valid-bug Indicates that a referenced Bugzilla bug is valid for the branch this PR is targeting. labels Feb 16, 2022
@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Feb 16, 2022

@GowthamShanmugam: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 2054949, which is invalid:

  • expected the bug to target the "4.10.0" release, but it targets "4.10.z" 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.

@SanjalKatiyar
Copy link
Contributor

/lgtm

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Feb 16, 2022
@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/bugzilla refresh

Recalculating validity in case the underlying Bugzilla bug has changed.

@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Feb 17, 2022

@openshift-bot: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 2054949, which is invalid:

  • expected the bug to target the "4.10.0" release, but it targets "4.10.z" 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
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Feb 18, 2022

@openshift-bot: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 2054949, which is invalid:

  • expected the bug to target the "4.10.0" release, but it targets "4.10.z" 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
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Feb 19, 2022

@openshift-bot: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 2054949, which is invalid:

  • expected the bug to target the "4.10.0" release, but it targets "4.10.z" 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
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Feb 20, 2022

@openshift-bot: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 2054949, which is invalid:

  • expected the bug to target the "4.10.0" release, but it targets "4.10.z" 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
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Feb 21, 2022

@openshift-bot: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 2054949, which is invalid:

  • expected the bug to target the "4.10.0" release, but it targets "4.10.z" 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
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Mar 10, 2022

@openshift-bot: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 2054949, which is invalid:

  • expected the bug to target the "4.10.0" release, but it targets "4.10.z" 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 openshift-ci bot 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 Mar 11, 2022
@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Mar 11, 2022

@openshift-bot: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 2054949, which is valid.

6 validation(s) were run on this bug
  • bug is open, matching expected state (open)
  • bug target release (4.10.z) matches configured target release for branch (4.10.z)
  • bug is in the state POST, which is one of the valid states (NEW, ASSIGNED, ON_DEV, POST, POST)
  • dependent bug Bugzilla bug 2048442 is in the state VERIFIED, which is one of the valid states (VERIFIED, RELEASE_PENDING, CLOSED (ERRATA), CLOSED (CURRENTRELEASE))
  • dependent Bugzilla bug 2048442 targets the "4.11.0" release, which is one of the valid target releases: 4.11.0
  • bug has dependents

Requesting review from QA contact:
/cc @rachael-george

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.

@rachael-george
Copy link

Verified the changes in the storagesystem creation page and storageclass creation page.

SC_page
CWD_token_auth
CWD_kube_auth

@ebenahar
Copy link

/label cherry-pick-approved
/approve

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the cherry-pick-approved Indicates a cherry-pick PR into a release branch has been approved by the release branch manager. label Mar 21, 2022
@nehaberry
Copy link

/label qe-approved

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the qe-approved Signifies that QE has signed off on this PR label Mar 30, 2022
@nehaberry
Copy link

/label cherry-pick-approved

@GowthamShanmugam
Copy link
Contributor

/backport-risk-assessed

@SanjalKatiyar
Copy link
Contributor

/approve

@SanjalKatiyar
Copy link
Contributor

/label backport-risk-assessed

@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Mar 30, 2022

@SanjalKatiyar: Can not set label backport-risk-assessed: Must be member in one of these teams: []

In response to this:

/label backport-risk-assessed

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.

@GowthamShanmugam
Copy link
Contributor

/label backport-risk-assessed

@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Mar 30, 2022

@GowthamShanmugam: Can not set label backport-risk-assessed: Must be member in one of these teams: []

In response to this:

/label backport-risk-assessed

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.

@nehaberry
Copy link

/label backport-risk-assessed

@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Mar 30, 2022

@nehaberry: Can not set label backport-risk-assessed: Must be member in one of these teams: []

In response to this:

/label backport-risk-assessed

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.

@bipuladh
Copy link
Contributor

/approve
/label backport-risk-assessed

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the backport-risk-assessed Indicates a PR to a release branch has been evaluated and considered safe to accept. label Mar 30, 2022
@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Mar 30, 2022

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: bipuladh, ebenahar, openshift-cherrypick-robot, SanjalKatiyar

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 openshift-ci bot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Mar 30, 2022
@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest-required

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

2 similar comments
@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest-required

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

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest-required

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

@SanjalKatiyar
Copy link
Contributor

/test e2e-gcp-console

@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Mar 31, 2022

@openshift-cherrypick-robot: 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/test-infra repository. I understand the commands that are listed here.

@openshift-merge-robot openshift-merge-robot merged commit 59a6268 into openshift:release-4.10 Mar 31, 2022
@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Mar 31, 2022

@openshift-cherrypick-robot: All pull requests linked via external trackers have merged:

Bugzilla bug 2054949 has been moved to the MODIFIED state.

In response to this:

[release-4.10] Bug 2054949: Disabling Vault SA based auth for storage class encryption

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
Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. backport-risk-assessed Indicates a PR to a release branch has been evaluated and considered safe to accept. 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. component/ceph Related to ceph-storage-plugin lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. qe-approved Signifies that QE has signed off on this PR
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

9 participants