Bump CAPI to v1.10.2 #1459
Bump CAPI to v1.10.2 #1459
Conversation
❌ Deploy Preview for kubernetes-sigs-cluster-api-gcp failed. Why did it fail? →
|
k8s-ci-robot
added
cncf-cla: yes
|
Welcome @tamalsaha! |
k8s-ci-robot
added
the
needs-ok-to-test
|
Hi @tamalsaha. Thanks for your PR. I'm waiting for a kubernetes-sigs member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the I understand the commands that are listed here. 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-sigs/prow repository. |
k8s-ci-robot
added
the
size/XXL
|
@tamalsaha - please can you remove the vendor folder from this PR. |
k8s-ci-robot
added
size/XL
|
Removed vendor folder @richardcase . PTAL. |
k8s-ci-robot
added
release-note-none
| @@ -33,36 +35,44 @@ var clusterlog = logf.Log.WithName("gcpcluster-resource") | |||
|
|
|||
| // SetupWebhookWithManager sets up and registers the webhook with the manager. | |||
| func (c *GCPCluster) SetupWebhookWithManager(mgr ctrl.Manager) error { | |||
| w := new(gcpClusterWebhook) | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Could we move the webhooks to internal/webhooks so that we start brining the structure in line with upstream CAPI and also kubebuilder
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This sounds reasonable. But can this be done in a separate pr (preferrably by project maintainers), as this will look like a lot of change in the pr and mask the actual change needed to make things work with the kubebuilder api breakage?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yeah +1 for doing this, but probably best to do it in a follow up PR to avoid polluting this one
|
Hey @tamalsaha Now that a complete Go dependecy bump PR has merged from @cpanato #1449 would you be able to rebase yours on top of the latest main. This should cover part of @richardcase comment here: #1459 (comment) Also it looks like the CAPI v1.10.0-rc.0 is out, so it would be nice to use that instead of beta.0. |
k8s-ci-robot
added
the
needs-rebase
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: tamalsaha The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.
Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
k8s-ci-robot
removed
the
needs-rebase
tamalsaha
force-pushed
the
k132
branch
2 times, most recently
from
b824d79 to
4bee5aa
Compare
|
/ok-to-test |
k8s-ci-robot
added
ok-to-test
|
@damdo: The following commands are available to trigger required jobs: The following commands are available to trigger optional jobs: Use 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-sigs/prow repository. |
|
/test pull-cluster-api-provider-gcp-conformance pull-cluster-api-provider-gcp-capi-e2e |
|
How do I fix the error? "failed to read "cluster-template-topology.yaml" from provider's repository "infrastructure-gcp": failed to read file "/logs/artifacts/repository/infrastructure-gcp/v1.10.99/cluster-template-topology.yaml" from local release v1.10.99: stat /logs/artifacts/repository/infrastructure-gcp/v1.10.99/cluster-template-topology.yaml: no such file or directory" |
|
@tamalsaha I think that might be a lingering issue with the test setup, trying to verify my assumption: #1470 and #1471 |
|
Ok so I think this: #1470 fixes the cluster-template-topology.yaml issue that you are seeing @tamalsaha Unfortunately that issue masks another one, which we need to look at fixing as well. cc. @salasberryfin for a review on #1470 as you worked on that area here |
|
#1470 merged 🎉 There are still some issues we are trying to fix. More context on: https://kubernetes.slack.com/archives/C01D1RFEN9G/p1745836188671049 |
|
I know we're currently blocked from running GKE tests, but any tests using MachinePools will fail after the version bump. This is due to a recent change in the I’d like to ask to check if passing a placeholder value could work as a short-term solution, but in the long run, we might need a passthrough API object like |
|
We are trying to get this new restriction relaxed kubernetes-sigs/cluster-api#12164 |
Signed-off-by: Tamal Saha <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Tamal Saha <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Tamal Saha <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Tamal Saha <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Tamal Saha <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Tamal Saha <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Tamal Saha <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Tamal Saha <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Tamal Saha <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Tamal Saha <[email protected]>
|
I guess we'll have to wait for the next CAPI patch release to have this fixed: kubernetes-sigs/cluster-api#12180. Is that correct? |
|
Yes correct @salasberryfin |
Signed-off-by: Tamal Saha <[email protected]>
|
New error: failed to read "cluster-template-topology.yaml" from provider's repository "infrastructure-gcp": failed to read file "/logs/artifacts/repository/infrastructure-gcp/v1.10.99/cluster-template-topology.yaml" from local release v1.10.99: stat /logs/artifacts/repository/infrastructure-gcp/v1.10.99/cluster-template-topology.yaml: no such file or directory |
|
@tamalsaha: The following tests failed, say
Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard. Please help us cut down on flakes by linking to an open issue when you hit one in your PR. 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-sigs/prow repository. I understand the commands that are listed here. |
It looks like you fixed that thanks |
|
@tamalsaha a couple of things to fix:
|
What type of PR is this?
What this PR does / why we need it:
I fixed the validator and defaulter interface broken by controller-runtime.
Which issue(s) this PR fixes (optional, in
fixes #<issue number>(, fixes #<issue_number>, ...)format, will close the issue(s) when PR gets merged):Fixes #
Special notes for your reviewer:
Please confirm that if this PR changes any image versions, then that's the sole change this PR makes.
TODOs:
Release note: