Warn users if not using latest release.

[AlexVulaj]

OCM-4624 | feat: Show a warning when a user attempts to run a command on a version other than the latest version from mirror.

Sample run from a local build:

$ rosa create cluster
E: The current version (1.2.27) is not up to date with latest released version (1.2.28).
E: It is recommended that you update to the latest version.
...

[ciaranRoche]

/retest-required

[AlexVulaj]

/hold

Waiting for input from UX

[AlexVulaj]

/retest-required

[andreadecorte]

should we have some local caching first? This is doing a call for version check at every single rosa command which may add a significant traffic on the mirror, but versions don't change every second

[thomasmckay]

should we have some local caching first? This is doing a call for version check at every single rosa command which may add a significant traffic on the mirror, but versions don't change every second

After team discussion, we'd prefer to not cache until it's a known problem (we believe that is unlikely). In addition, it would be interesting/beneficial to track which commands are being run.

[AlexVulaj]

@ciaranRoche There's still a prow build failing that looks strange to me, any thoughts on what might be going on?

[ciaranRoche]

/test images-images

[cben]

Will rosa version and rosa verify rosa-client commands now make the check (and possibly print the message) twice?

I guess at least this line making rosa version also run the verify rosa-client logic can be dropped:

rosa/cmd/version/cmd.go

Line 38 in 900564b

rosa.Cmd.Run(rosa.Cmd, []string{})

[cben]

After team discussion, we'd prefer to not cache until it's a known problem (we believe that is unlikely).

For me, rosa verify rosa-client alone takes ~0.9sec.
(ping mirror.openshift.com is 65–75ms RTT for me, so does it take nearly a second for the HTTP server to send the directory listing?)

So with this change, every command would become slightly, but perceptibly slower.
I'd not love that even for interactive use.
It can get worse, both for speed and traffic, when scripted in a loop... 🔃

• Worth confirming with mirror.openshift.com admins they don't mind getting all that traffic?

• This header is interesting (using version, verify rosa-client: Support --debug #1640, 100% reproducible)

  time=2023-12-05T20:30:43+02:00 level=debug msg=Response header 'X-Cache' is 'Miss from cloudfront'
  

  In theory, a directory listing could be much faster if cached at CDN level. Is it un-cachable deliberately (invalidation is hard) or just oversight?

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 17.39130% with 19 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 22.44%. Comparing base (b480a5d) to head (d7bf0f4).
Report is 16 commits behind head on master.

Files	Patch %	Lines
cmd/rosa/main.go	0.00%	19 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #1570      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   21.71%   22.44%   +0.72%     
==========================================
  Files         118      129      +11     
  Lines       19809    20574     +765     
==========================================
+ Hits         4302     4617     +315     
- Misses      15186    15609     +423     
- Partials      321      348      +27     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[robpblake]

See #1777

[AlexVulaj]

/retest

[ciaranRoche]

LGTM

Thanks for you patience on this one Alex, glad to have this check in place when it lands.

@robpblake can you give this a final ack before we merge 🙏

[robpblake]

/unhold

[robpblake]

/lgtm

[openshift-ci]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: AlexVulaj, ciaranRoche, robpblake

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 [ciaranRoche,robpblake]

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

[openshift-ci]

@AlexVulaj: 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.