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

Bug 1793923: [release-4.3] [Baremetal] Haproxy add support for IPv6 frontend #1401

Conversation

openshift-cherrypick-robot

This is an automated cherry-pick of #1256

/assign cybertron

@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

@openshift-cherrypick-robot: No Bugzilla bug is referenced in the title of this pull request.
To reference a bug, add 'Bug XXX:' to the title of this pull request and request another bug refresh with /bugzilla refresh.

In response to this:

[release-4.3] [Baremetal] Haproxy add support for IPv6 frontend

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.

@cybertron
Copy link
Member

This needs to reference bz 1793923, but I don't seem to have permission to edit the PR title.

@runcom runcom changed the title [release-4.3] [Baremetal] Haproxy add support for IPv6 frontend Bug 1793923: [release-4.3] [Baremetal] Haproxy add support for IPv6 frontend Jan 22, 2020
@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the bugzilla/invalid-bug Indicates that a referenced Bugzilla bug is invalid for the branch this PR is targeting. label Jan 22, 2020
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

@openshift-cherrypick-robot: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 1793923, which is invalid:

  • expected the bug to target the "4.3.0" release, but it targets "---" 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 1793923: [release-4.3] [Baremetal] Haproxy add support for IPv6 frontend

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.

@runcom
Copy link
Member

runcom commented Jan 22, 2020

This needs to reference bz 1793923, but I don't seem to have permission to edit the PR title.

done

@cybertron
Copy link
Member

/bugzilla refresh

@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

@cybertron: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 1793923, which is invalid:

  • expected the bug to target the "4.3.0" release, but it targets "4.3.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.

@cybertron
Copy link
Member

/bugzilla refresh

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

@cybertron: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 1793923, 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.

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.

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot removed the bugzilla/invalid-bug Indicates that a referenced Bugzilla bug is invalid for the branch this PR is targeting. label Jan 22, 2020
@celebdor
Copy link
Contributor

/approve

@celebdor
Copy link
Contributor

/assign @runcom

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Jan 22, 2020
@kikisdeliveryservice
Copy link
Contributor

@celebdor @runcom this needs a LGTM

@kikisdeliveryservice
Copy link
Contributor

/test e2e-gcp-upgrade

@runcom
Copy link
Member

runcom commented Jan 28, 2020

/lgtm

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Jan 28, 2020
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: celebdor, kikisdeliveryservice, openshift-cherrypick-robot, runcom

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 [kikisdeliveryservice,runcom]

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

@eparis
Copy link
Member

eparis commented Feb 4, 2020

/bugzilla refresh

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot removed the bugzilla/valid-bug Indicates that a referenced Bugzilla bug is valid for the branch this PR is targeting. label Feb 4, 2020
@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the bugzilla/invalid-bug Indicates that a referenced Bugzilla bug is invalid for the branch this PR is targeting. label Feb 4, 2020
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

@eparis: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 1793923, which is invalid:

  • expected dependent Bugzilla bug 1793921 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:

/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.

@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

@openshift-cherrypick-robot: PR needs rebase.

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 needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Feb 10, 2020
@kikisdeliveryservice
Copy link
Contributor

closing in favor of #1454 that is the same cherrypick but with a rebase.

/close

@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

@kikisdeliveryservice: Closed this PR.

In response to this:

closing in favor of #1454 that is the same cherrypick but with a rebase.

/close

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. bugzilla/invalid-bug Indicates that a referenced Bugzilla bug is invalid for the branch this PR is targeting. lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. size/XS Denotes a PR that changes 0-9 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

8 participants