-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 226
Bug 1814582: [release-4.4] [OCPCLOUD-774] Add Node startup timeout API field #622
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
Conversation
@JoelSpeed: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 1814582, which is valid. The bug has been updated to refer to the pull request using the external bug tracker. 6 validation(s) were run on this bug
In response to this:
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. |
/approve |
/lgtm |
/approve |
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: Danil-Grigorev, enxebre 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 |
/retest Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes. |
4 similar comments
/retest Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes. |
/retest Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes. |
/retest Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes. |
/retest Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes. |
This looks like a feature backports to me (addition of field to a type is what is concerning me.) Can we get justification for the need of this backport? /cc @mrunalp |
This is to bug fix a hardcoded narrow timeout consistently with what we do in higher releases. To proactively avoid seeing issues where the timeout wouldn’t be enough and avoid having api skew. The API change is additive and backward compatible with existing default behaviour. I think we can skip back porting this though and reconsider if we see a customer case coming through if that make sense @JoelSpeed @shawn-hurley . |
Sounds reasonable to me! We can reopen if ever we get a customer case |
@JoelSpeed: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 1814582. The bug has been updated to no longer refer to the pull request using the external bug tracker. In response to this:
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. |
Cherry-pick of #501
Replaces #523 as there were conflicts that needed to be manually resolved