cluster: cleanup ansible import related things

[dveeden]

What problem does this PR solve?

Follow-up for #2565

This reduces a lot of complexity and code that isn't used or tested often.

What is changed and how it works?

Remove more Ansible import related things.

• This is keeping the Imported field, but sets the key to -.

Questions
Should we check if the imported field is set in the config and throw an error if that's the case?

Check List

Tests

• Unit test
• Integration test
• Manual test (add detailed scripts or steps below)
• No code

Code changes

• Has exported function/method change
• Has exported variable/fields change
• Has interface methods change
• Has persistent data change

Side effects

• Possible performance regression
• Increased code complexity
• Breaking backward compatibility

Related changes

• Need to cherry-pick to the release branch
• Need to update the documentation

Release notes:

Clusters imported from an ansible installation are not supported anymore

[ti-chi-bot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by:
Once this PR has been reviewed and has the lgtm label, please assign xhebox for approval. For more information see the Code Review Process.
Please ensure that each of them provides their approval before proceeding.

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

Details

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• OWNERS

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

[dveeden]

/cc @xhebox

[AstroProfundis]

TiDB-Ansible used a different dir scheme on nodes, and when importing to TiUP Cluster it's not capable to change that, so there are many compatibility wraps.

For those old legacy clusters, if these wrapping codes got removed, the cluster might be unable to start after reloading config with new tiup-cluster, (or maybe better, they fail specification validation so nothing actually change on their node, no data loss risk)

I don't know if there are still any of those old clusters left but it's better to confirm. AFAIK some on-premise deployments were of this kind, I don't know if they are still in use.

[dveeden]

@AstroProfundis thanks for the info. This is why I checked "Breaking backward compatibility" and set the release note to mention this.

[xhebox]

@AstroProfundis thanks for the info. This is why I checked "Breaking backward compatibility" and set the release note to mention this.

We can maintain the 1.6 version for backward compatibility.

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 19.23077% with 21 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 41.25%. Comparing base (5468a01) to head (f715ff0).
⚠️ Report is 14 commits behind head on master.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
pkg/cluster/operation/destroy.go	0.00%	13 Missing ⚠️
pkg/cluster/manager/builder.go	0.00%	4 Missing ⚠️
pkg/cluster/manager/deploy.go	0.00%	1 Missing ⚠️
pkg/cluster/manager/destroy.go	0.00%	1 Missing ⚠️
pkg/cluster/manager/reload.go	0.00%	1 Missing ⚠️
pkg/cluster/manager/scale_in.go	0.00%	1 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #2630      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   40.90%   41.25%   +0.36%     
==========================================
  Files         363      363              
  Lines       37767    37119     -648     
==========================================
- Hits        15445    15312     -133     
+ Misses      20407    19912     -495     
+ Partials     1915     1895      -20     

Flag	Coverage Δ
unittest	?

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

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

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.