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

Update default catalog namespace #2371

Conversation

kevinrizza
Copy link
Member

default global catalog namespace shouldn't be vendor specific

default global catalog namespace shouldn't be vendor specific
@openshift-ci
Copy link

openshift-ci bot commented Sep 23, 2021

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: kevinrizza

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 Sep 23, 2021
@timflannagan
Copy link
Contributor

/lgtm

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Sep 23, 2021
@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest-required

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

@@ -28,7 +28,7 @@ import (
const (
catalogNamespaceEnvVarName = "GLOBAL_CATALOG_NAMESPACE"
defaultWakeupInterval = 15 * time.Minute
defaultCatalogNamespace = "openshift-operator-lifecycle-manager"
defaultCatalogNamespace = "olm"
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

maybe default is even more agnostic?

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest-required

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

1 similar comment
@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest-required

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

@njhale
Copy link
Member

njhale commented Sep 23, 2021

/override ci/unit

@openshift-ci
Copy link

openshift-ci bot commented Sep 23, 2021

@njhale: /override requires a failed status context or a job name to operate on.
The following unknown contexts were given:

  • ci/unit

Only the following contexts were expected:

  • tide

In response to this:

/override ci/unit

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

/retest-required

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

1 similar comment
@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest-required

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

@timflannagan
Copy link
Contributor

holding so the bot doesn't go crazy - hopefully have a fix for that problematic unit test.

/hold

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. label Sep 23, 2021
@timflannagan timflannagan reopened this Sep 23, 2021
@timflannagan
Copy link
Contributor

Closing/re-opening as the re-testing the unit test was checking out the wrong master branch commit.

/hold cancel

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot removed the do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. label Sep 23, 2021
@openshift-merge-robot openshift-merge-robot merged commit 33606c9 into operator-framework:master Sep 23, 2021
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. lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

5 participants