csi topology is only PV relatead, do not need #111
Conversation
|
/assign @coreydaley |
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: gabemontero 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 |
openshift-ci
bot
added
the
approved
|
/lgtm |
|
aws flake / no cluster install on disruptive test https://prow.ci.openshift.org/view/gs/origin-ci-test/pr-logs/pull/openshift_csi-driver-shared-resource/111/pull-ci-openshift-csi-driver-shared-resource-master-e2e-aws-csi-driver-disruptive/1564589991361777664 /test e2e-aws-csi-driver-disruptive |
|
another aws flake / no cluster install with https://prow.ci.openshift.org/view/gs/origin-ci-test/pr-logs/pull/openshift_csi-driver-shared-resource/111/pull-ci-openshift-csi-driver-shared-resource-master-e2e-aws-csi-driver-slow/1564589991433080832 /test e2e-aws-csi-driver-slow |
|
@gabemontero: 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. |
|
/label docs-approved no docs update |
|
/label px-approved no impact |
openshift-ci
bot
added
docs-approved
|
/assign @prietyc123 unless you disagree @coreydaley probably makes sense for @prietyc123 to run through the smoke tests with this change, make sure an openshift build with entitlements works, though given the e2e's passing, I don't see why those would fail then based on the results, the qe approved label can get added |
|
/assign @jitendar-singh @gabemontero Priti is on loan to another department right now |
|
/label qe-approved |
openshift-ci
bot
added
the
qe-approved
via an initial conversation with @elmiko and then a joint conversation with him, @jsafrane and @coreydaley (https://coreos.slack.com/archives/CBQHQFU0N/p1661804153262309) discovered that our initial bootstrap of shared resource from the upstream hostpath/shared secret projects left an element of CSI PV support, which of course is not needed with shared resource since it is inline ephemeral only.
cleaning up with this PR
Lastly, since shared resource is tech preview only, my guess is backporting to 4.10.x is not super critical, but since I'm no longer on openshift, I'll defer to @coreydaley and @elmiko to sort that out.