✨ Write kubeadm control plane version file for workers to use to fetch the matching kubeadm binary by AcidLeroy · Pull Request #13433 · kubernetes-sigs/cluster-api

AcidLeroy · 2026-03-10T18:45:34Z

What this PR does / why we need it

Kubernetes allows some skew between the control plane and kubelets, but kubeadm's own skew policy requires the kubeadm binary used for kubeadm join to match the kubeadm used when the cluster was created or last upgraded on that path—so you cannot rely on an older kubeadm on the worker when the control plane is newer.

That conflicts with real Cluster API flows (e.g. scaling or remediating workers still on an older Kubernetes while the control plane has moved ahead), as discussed in #13315.

This PR:

Resolves the control plane Kubernetes version for join (from KubeadmControlPlane when available) and uses it when generating join bootstrap data so join config matches the cluster the node is joining. If the control plane object cannot be read while a controlPlaneRef is set, reconciliation fails and status conditions surface the error (no silent fallback to the Machine version in that case). When there is no control plane ref or the referenced object does not expose a version, the controller falls back to the Machine's Kubernetes version as before.
Surfaces how join version was chosen on KubeadmConfig: the ControlPlaneKubernetesVersionAvailable condition stays True for both success paths, but Reason (and Message) distinguish version read from the control plane reference vs version taken from the Machine because the reference is unset or has no version—so operators can see at a glance whether the skew contract is being driven by the cluster control plane or the worker.
Adds a new contentFormat field to spec.files with two values: "raw" (default, content used verbatim as today) and "template" (content rendered as Go text/template). Template data includes {{ .controlPlane.version }}, so operators can wire their own steps (scripts, package installs, downloads) to install a kubeadm binary that matches the control plane before kubeadm join runs—without CAPI prescribing a single install mechanism.
RBAC for the kubeadm bootstrap controller to read KubeadmControlPlane where needed for version resolution.
E2E template for cluster-template-topology-kubeadm-version moved into its own kustomize sub-folder (consistent with other topology templates) and wired into the generate-e2e-templates-main Makefile target.
Tests: unit coverage for template parse vs execute failures in spec.files, controller tests for the new condition reasons (including scheme fix for WorkerJoinWithControlPlaneRef), and E2E coverage (KubeadmVersionOnJoin + clusterclass-quick-start-kubeadm-version) demonstrating the pattern end-to-end.

sequenceDiagram
    participant CP as Control plane (newer K8s)
    participant BC as Kubeadm bootstrap controller
    participant W as Worker (older image / kubelet)

    BC->>CP: Read KubeadmControlPlane.spec.version
    CP-->>BC: e.g. v1.35.0
    BC->>BC: Build join data + render spec.files templates
    BC->>W: Render spec.files (contentFormat: template) e.g. fetch script with {{ .controlPlane.version }}
    Note over W: preKubeadmCommands (operator-defined)
    W->>W: Install/fetch kubeadm matching CP version
    W->>CP: kubeadm join (binary matches policy)

Which issue(s) this PR fixes (optional, in fixes #<issue number>(, fixes #<issue_number>, ...) format, will close the issue(s) when PR gets merged):

Related to #13315

/area bootstrap
/area test

k8s-ci-robot · 2026-03-10T18:45:40Z

@AcidLeroy: The label(s) area/test cannot be applied, because the repository doesn't have them.

Details

In response to this:

What this PR does / why we need it:

When a worker node joins a cluster where the control plane has already been upgraded to a newer Kubernetes version, the kubeadm version skew policy can be violated: the joining node's kubeadm binary (matching its older OS image) is older than the control plane version. This becomes a real problem in scenarios like scaling up a MachineDeployment during an upgrade or when supporting workers pinned to older Kubernetes versions long-term.

This PR introduces a kubeadm version contract for worker nodes joining a cluster:

Control plane version resolution for join: The kubeadm bootstrap controller now resolves the control plane version (from KubeadmControlPlane.spec.version) and uses it—instead of the joining machine's own version—when generating the kubeadm join configuration. For example, a v1.34 worker joining a v1.35 control plane will get join data generated for v1.35.

Version file written to the node: A file is written at /run/cluster-api/kubeadm-version/version on every joining worker node (via both cloud-init and ignition). This file contains the control plane's Kubernetes version and acts as a contract: operators can provide a custom preKubeadmCommands script that reads this file and fetches/installs the matching kubeadm binary before kubeadm join runs.

RBAC: The kubeadm bootstrap controller now has read access to KubeadmControlPlane resources to look up the control plane version.

E2E tests: A new KubeadmVersionOnJoin e2e test validates the flow end-to-end using CAPD with a dedicated ClusterClass (clusterclass-quick-start-kubeadm-version) that embeds a fetch script reading the version file.

Which issue(s) this PR fixes (optional, in fixes #<issue number>(, fixes #<issue_number>, ...) format, will close the issue(s) when PR gets merged):
Related to #13315

/area bootstrap
/area test

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 · 2026-03-10T18:45:45Z

[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 chrischdi for approval. For more information see the Code Review Process.

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

k8s-ci-robot · 2026-03-10T18:45:46Z

Hi @AcidLeroy. 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 /ok-to-test on its own line. Until that is done, I will not automatically test new commits in this PR, but the usual testing commands by org members will still work.

Regular contributors should join the org to skip this step.

Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the ok-to-test label.

I understand the commands that are listed here.

Details

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.

zarcen

Thanks for putting all this together @AcidLeroy. Have some suggestions

linux-foundation-easycla · 2026-03-11T17:52:31Z

The committers listed above are authorized under a signed CLA.

✅ login: AcidLeroy / name: Cody W. Eilar (01dd23d, 0b40256, 27988ea, 2938447, 2d9a516, 7456a30, 7517d57, b12f313, dbc7e68, eef3ec4)

neolit123

i posted some comments on slack:
https://kubernetes.slack.com/archives/C8TSNPY4T/p1773251442281699

i think CAPI can just write the ClusterConfiguration on disk too.

AcidLeroy · 2026-03-11T22:05:54Z

i posted some comments on slack: https://kubernetes.slack.com/archives/C8TSNPY4T/p1773251442281699

i think CAPI can just write the ClusterConfiguration on disk too.

@neolit123 I will provide an alternative solution by writing the ClusterConfiguration in a separate branch for now. If we find that we prefer that one, I'll merge it into this PR.

AcidLeroy · 2026-03-12T00:32:42Z

@neolit123 Is this sort of what you are thinking: https://github.com/AcidLeroy/cluster-api/pull/3/changes

neolit123 · 2026-03-12T06:28:52Z

@neolit123 Is this sort of what you are thinking: https://github.com/AcidLeroy/cluster-api/pull/3/changes

yes, sgtm, but up to maintainers to decide.

EDIT: in the slack thread we figured out that the CAPI v1beta2 ClusteConfiguration doesn't have the kubernetesVersion field, so my proposal is not useful.

AcidLeroy · 2026-03-19T16:23:29Z

Rather than hard coding a file, we should look into providing a go template file (kubeadmconfig) and then in the kube bootsrtap config controller, we could render that file with the version directly into it.

Look into to resolveFiles in kubeadm and templating the version into the "fetch kubeadm version" script.

AcidLeroy · 2026-03-19T16:38:16Z

This file might be in the gitignore file. Should double check.

It definitely is on gitignore. If I create a file with a similar name it's ignored and I don't see why it should be different for this file.

Let's do the following

Let's move the file into a sub-folder called cluster-template-topology-kubeadm

Let's adjust the generate-e2e-templates-main Makefile target to copy the file up one level (Please make sure it is at the right place in the Makefile target based on alphabetic ordering of the target file name)

That way it fits into our regular folder structure and is easier to find

co-author: Wei-Chen Chen <[email protected]>

zjs · 2026-03-23T08:47:05Z

+// getControlPlaneVersionForJoin returns the control plane (cluster) version from the cluster's ControlPlaneRef,
+// e.g. KubeadmControlPlane.spec.version. Returns empty string if the cluster has no ControlPlaneRef or the version
+// cannot be read (e.g. control plane not found or does not support version). Used for worker join so that
+// a 1.34 node uses kubeadm 1.35 when the control plane is at 1.35, for example.
+func (r *KubeadmConfigReconciler) getControlPlaneVersionForJoin(ctx context.Context, scope *Scope) string {
+	if !scope.Cluster.Spec.ControlPlaneRef.IsDefined() {
+		return ""
+	}
+	controlPlane, err := external.GetObjectFromContractVersionedRef(ctx, r.Client, scope.Cluster.Spec.ControlPlaneRef, scope.Cluster.Namespace)
+	if err != nil {
+		scope.V(4).Info("Could not get control plane for version, falling back to machine version", "error", err)
+		return ""
+	}
+	cpVersion, err := contract.ControlPlane().Version().Get(controlPlane)
+	if err != nil {
+		if !errors.Is(err, contract.ErrFieldNotFound) {
+			scope.V(4).Info("Could not get control plane version, falling back to machine version", "error", err)
+		}
+		return ""
+	}
+	if cpVersion == nil {
+		return ""
+	}
+	return *cpVersion
+}


question: I notice this falls back to the machine version for any error (not found, permission denied, network issue, etc.). Is that intentional for all error types, or would it be worth distinguishing "control plane not found / field not present" (expected) from unexpected failures?

Just wondering whether masking unexpected errors here could make debugging harder down the road.

Yeah, I think there are some error states here that we can requeue for and only fall back to machine version as an absolute last resort. I'll push some changes up shortly with an alternative to what I have here.

@zjs, I introduced some changes to include another condition so that we can surface any issues with getting the CP version. In this case, we only fall back to the machine version if we absolutely have to, and we'll be able to see what the issue is via the status conditions. LMK what you think! Thanks!

Curious to see how others feel, but personally, I like it!

Adding an entire condition just to surface this error seems to much to me.

We should be very careful with introducing new conditions

Based on some of my other comments we might not need this anymore anyway

cc @fabriziopandini

sbueringer · 2026-04-02T08:10:40Z

Let's use hold instead of draft so we can run CI

/ok-to-test
/test pull-cluster-api-e2e-main-gke

sbueringer · 2026-04-02T08:17:47Z

 type Encoding string

+// FileContentFormat specifies how file content is interpreted after resolving content/contentFrom and before writing bootstrap data.
+// +kubebuilder:validation:Enum="";go-template


I think I would use "raw" and "template" as enum values.

I would not make "" a valid value. This is already covered because the field is optional.

I would use template instead of go-template for consistency with other parts of our API: JSONPatchValue.Template & Naming.Template.

(I think after my suggestions are implemented the linter should also be happy)

sbueringer · 2026-04-02T08:18:30Z

 				),
 			)
 		}
+		if file.ContentFormat != "" && file.ContentFormat != FileContentFormatGoTemplate {


This "manual" validation is not necessary. This is already covered via the enum kubebuilder markers.

See CRD schema:

enum: - "" - go-template

Addressed in commit#2d9a51

sbueringer · 2026-04-02T08:27:48Z

+	// (semver.String(), no "v" prefix). For a worker joining a cluster, that version is the control plane
+	// Kubernetes version when the controller can read it; otherwise the Machine's version.
+	// +optional
+	ContentFormat FileContentFormat `json:"contentFormat,omitempty"`


Please align the template part of the godoc to what we did here:

cluster-api/api/core/v1beta2/machinedeployment_types.go

Lines 391 to 410 in 5cfc702

// template defines the template to use for generating the names of the

// Machine objects.

// If not defined, it will fallback to `{{ .machineSet.name }}-{{ .random }}`.

// If the generated name string exceeds 63 characters, it will be trimmed to

// 58 characters and will

// get concatenated with a random suffix of length 5.

// Length of the template string must not exceed 256 characters.

// The template allows the following variables `.cluster.name`,

// `.machineSet.name` and `.random`.

// The variable `.cluster.name` retrieves the name of the cluster object

// that owns the Machines being created.

// The variable `.machineSet.name` retrieves the name of the MachineSet

// object that owns the Machines being created.

// The variable `.random` is substituted with random alphanumeric string,

// without vowels, of length 5. This variable is required part of the

// template. If not provided, validation will fail.

// +optional

// +kubebuilder:validation:MinLength=1

// +kubebuilder:validation:MaxLength=256

Template string `json:"template,omitempty"`

nit: let's move this field after content / contentFrom so all the options about file content are grouped toghether

sbueringer · 2026-04-02T08:35:23Z

+	// KubernetesVersion is the effective Kubernetes version for bootstrap data (semver.String(), no "v" prefix).
+	// For a worker Machine joining a cluster, this is the control plane Kubernetes version when the controller
+	// can read it; otherwise the Machine's version.
+	KubernetesVersion string


I think we should:

provide it as controlPlane.version similar to builtin variables, e.g. via

map[string]interface{}{ "controlPlane": map[string]interface{}{ "version": version, }, })

Accordingly we should not fallback to the Machine version

Provide the version with v prefix otherwise it's inconsistent with the version field in the Cluster object and also with builtin variables

+1 to have a well defined and stable semantic for controlPlane.version (no fallback logic); if this semantic will not be consistent with the one in buildin variables, we should consider adding a suffix, but we can iterate on this.

notably, having a well defined and stable semantic also allows to ensure a consistent the same behaviour for file templates both for init/join control plane and join workers (less magic knobs/hidden behaviours, easier to understand for users and to maintain for us)

refactored to have controlPlane.version struct

sbueringer · 2026-04-02T08:41:38Z

+*/
+
+// Package bootstrapfiles contains helpers for KubeadmConfig spec.files processing.
+package bootstrapfiles


Looks like this is only used in the KubeadmConfig controller. If there is no need for a separate package I wouldn't create one just for this

moved to bootstrap/kubeadm/internal/controllers/template.go to avoid unnecessary new package

sbueringer · 2026-04-02T09:05:18Z

    - sourcePath: "../data/infrastructure-docker/main/cluster-template-topology-autoscaler.yaml"
    - sourcePath: "../data/infrastructure-docker/main/cluster-template-topology.yaml"
    - sourcePath: "../data/infrastructure-docker/main/cluster-template-topology-taints.yaml"
+    - sourcePath: "../data/infrastructure-docker/main/cluster-template-topology-kubeadm-version.yaml"


This list is (or at least should be) alphabetically ordered, please adjust accordingly

(same for the ClusterClass file below)

made it alphabetically ordered

sbueringer · 2026-04-02T09:12:13Z

+          arch=$$(uname -m)
+          case "$$arch" in
+            x86_64) arch="amd64" ;;
+            aarch64|arm64) arch="arm64" ;;


Probably a typo "aarch64"

sbueringer · 2026-04-02T09:13:32Z

+          echo "Fetching kubeadm $${version} ($${arch}) from $${url}"
+          echo "fetch-kubeadm.sh: curl -fLsS -o <tmpfile> $$url"
+          tmp=$$(mktemp -p /tmp kubeadm.XXXXXX)
+          if curl -fLsS -o "$$tmp" "$$url"; then


Should we use something like this? --retry 5 --retry-all-errors (would like to avoid flakes in CI)

Added. Good suggestion

sbueringer · 2026-04-02T09:14:19Z

+      preKubeadmCommands:
+      - |
+        command -v curl >/dev/null 2>&1 || (apt-get update && apt-get install -y --no-install-recommends curl ca-certificates && rm -rf /var/lib/apt/lists/*)
+      - 'sh /run/cluster-api/fetch-kubeadm.sh 2>&1 | tee /var/log/fetch-kubeadm.log || true'


Looks like the bootstrap will continue even if the script fails (but not sure)

Would be good to fail bootstrap if the script fails if that's doable with reasonable effort

sbueringer · 2026-04-02T09:16:31Z

+	"k8s.io/utils/ptr"
+)
+
+var _ = Describe("When a worker joins during a control plane upgrade [ClusterClass]", Label("ClusterClass"), func() {


Maybe rephrase to "When a worker joins with kubeadm with an older version than the control plane [ClusterClass]"

rephrases as suggested

sbueringer · 2026-04-02T10:01:27Z

 // +kubebuilder:validation:Enum=base64;gzip;gzip+base64
 type Encoding string

+// FileContentFormat specifies how file content is interpreted after resolving content/contentFrom and before writing bootstrap data.


nit: This enum is currently defined between Encoding and the encoding constants. Let's please move this to either above or below Encoding

Moved as suggested

k8s-ci-robot · 2026-04-02T18:14:09Z

@AcidLeroy: The following test failed, say /retest to rerun all failed tests or /retest-required to rerun all mandatory failed tests:

Test name	Commit	Details	Required	Rerun command
pull-cluster-api-e2e-main-gke	`27988ea`	link	true	`/test pull-cluster-api-e2e-main-gke`

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.

Details

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.

fabriziopandini · 2026-04-13T15:31:33Z

+	// FileContentFormatRaw means content is used verbatim.
+	FileContentFormatRaw FileContentFormat = "raw"
+	// FileContentFormatTemplate means content is rendered as a Go text/template.
+	// Available template variables are documented by the kubeadm bootstrap provider.


Nit

Suggested change

// Available template variables are documented by the kubeadm bootstrap provider.

Available template variables are documented down below in this file where FileContentFormat is used
(same in v1beta2)

fabriziopandini · 2026-04-13T15:35:14Z

-	clusterv1beta1 "sigs.k8s.io/cluster-api/api/core/v1beta1"
-)
+import clusterv1beta1 "sigs.k8s.io/cluster-api/api/core/v1beta1"
+


nit

Suggested change

(no need of additional empty lines)

fabriziopandini · 2026-04-13T15:35:31Z


 import clusterv1 "sigs.k8s.io/cluster-api/api/core/v1beta2"

+


nit

Suggested change

(no need of additional empty lines)

fabriziopandini · 2026-04-13T16:19:58Z

+// getControlPlaneVersionForJoin returns the control plane (cluster) version from the cluster's ControlPlaneRef,
+// e.g. KubeadmControlPlane.spec.version. Returns ("", nil) if the cluster has no ControlPlaneRef or the referenced
+// control plane does not expose spec.version (ErrFieldNotFound or unset); callers should fall back to the machine's
+// Kubernetes version only in those cases. Returns an error if the control plane object cannot be fetched or if
+// the version field cannot be read for any other reason.


I'm still a little bit confused by the semantic of this func and its intended usage.

If the goal of this func is to return the value for the controlPlane.version variable, then there should not be any fallback in the machine's Kubernetes version (and the usage should be the same in init, join workers and join control plane).

Pushing this a little bit further, the entire template resolution should become a internal implementation detail of resolveFile.

I would expect something similar to

Suggested change

// getControlPlaneVersionForJoin returns the control plane (cluster) version from the cluster's ControlPlaneRef,

// e.g. KubeadmControlPlane.spec.version. Returns ("", nil) if the cluster has no ControlPlaneRef or the referenced

// control plane does not expose spec.version (ErrFieldNotFound or unset); callers should fall back to the machine's

// Kubernetes version only in those cases. Returns an error if the control plane object cannot be fetched or if

// the version field cannot be read for any other reason.

// getControlPlaneVersionForJoin returns the control plane (cluster) version from the cluster's ControlPlaneRef,

// e.g. KubeadmControlPlane.spec.version. Returns ("", nil) if the cluster has no ControlPlaneRef or the referenced

// control plane does not expose spec.version (ErrFieldNotFound or unset).

// Returns an error if the control plane object cannot be fetched or if

// the version field cannot be read for any other reason.

Also thinking more about it, it makes sense to just error out instead of falling back to machine's version. It'd be some seriously trouble for a joining worker when it cannot fetch controlPlane.version. Will address this in next commit

fabriziopandini · 2026-04-13T16:26:51Z

should this be something like kubeadm_join_old_nodes (so we focus on outcomes)?
same comment apply to the func/type name

k8s-ci-robot added the area/bootstrap Issues or PRs related to bootstrap providers label Mar 10, 2026

k8s-ci-robot added the cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. label Mar 10, 2026

k8s-ci-robot requested review from JoelSpeed and Karthik-K-N March 10, 2026 18:45

k8s-ci-robot added size/XL Denotes a PR that changes 500-999 lines, ignoring generated files. needs-ok-to-test Indicates a PR that requires an org member to verify it is safe to test. labels Mar 10, 2026

AcidLeroy commented Mar 10, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread Tiltfile Outdated

k8s-ci-robot added the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Mar 10, 2026

AcidLeroy changed the title ~~Write kubeadm control plane version file for workers to use to fetch the matching kubeadm~~ ✨ Write kubeadm control plane version file for workers to use to fetch the matching kubeadm Mar 10, 2026

AcidLeroy changed the title ~~✨ Write kubeadm control plane version file for workers to use to fetch the matching kubeadm~~ ✨ Write kubeadm control plane version file for workers to use to fetch the matching kubeadm binary Mar 10, 2026

AcidLeroy force-pushed the kubeadm-version branch from a240d31 to 52b943c Compare March 10, 2026 19:00

k8s-ci-robot removed the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Mar 10, 2026

AcidLeroy force-pushed the kubeadm-version branch from 52b943c to c5baa39 Compare March 10, 2026 21:46

AcidLeroy marked this pull request as draft March 11, 2026 17:18

k8s-ci-robot added the do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. label Mar 11, 2026

zarcen reviewed Mar 11, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread bootstrap/kubeadm/internal/cloudinit/cloudinit_test.go Outdated

k8s-ci-robot added cncf-cla: no Indicates the PR's author has not signed the CNCF CLA. and removed cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. labels Mar 11, 2026

neolit123 reviewed Mar 11, 2026

View reviewed changes

AcidLeroy commented Mar 19, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread test/e2e/kubeadm_version_on_join.go Outdated

AcidLeroy commented Mar 19, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread test/e2e/kubeadm_version_on_join.go Outdated

AcidLeroy force-pushed the kubeadm-version branch from b9466e1 to 97526b7 Compare March 20, 2026 21:25

k8s-ci-robot added cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. and removed cncf-cla: no Indicates the PR's author has not signed the CNCF CLA. labels Mar 20, 2026

AcidLeroy added 2 commits March 20, 2026 14:26

Allow workers on an older K8s version to join newer CP

2938447

co-author: Wei-Chen Chen <[email protected]>

Use template rendering of file

dbc7e68

AcidLeroy force-pushed the kubeadm-version branch from 97526b7 to dbc7e68 Compare March 20, 2026 21:56

Use a subset of preflight checks

01dd23d

zjs reviewed Mar 23, 2026

View reviewed changes

Add conditions for fetching control plane

0b40256

k8s-ci-robot added size/XXL Denotes a PR that changes 1000+ lines, ignoring generated files. and removed size/XL Denotes a PR that changes 500-999 lines, ignoring generated files. labels Mar 24, 2026

zjs reviewed Mar 24, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread api/bootstrap/kubeadm/v1beta1/kubeadmconfig_types.go

Comment thread api/bootstrap/kubeadm/v1beta2/kubeadmconfig_types.go

Comment thread bootstrap/kubeadm/internal/controllers/template_test.go

Comment thread bootstrap/kubeadm/internal/controllers/kubeadmconfig_controller.go

Update tests and condition messaging

27988ea

sbueringer marked this pull request as ready for review April 2, 2026 08:10

k8s-ci-robot removed the do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. label Apr 2, 2026

k8s-ci-robot requested a review from g-gaston April 2, 2026 08:10

k8s-ci-robot added ok-to-test Indicates a non-member PR verified by an org member that is safe to test. and removed needs-ok-to-test Indicates a PR that requires an org member to verify it is safe to test. labels Apr 2, 2026

sbueringer reviewed Apr 2, 2026

View reviewed changes

AcidLeroy added 3 commits April 2, 2026 10:47

Address comments

2d9a516

Remove config edits

b12f313

Fix linting

7456a30

AcidLeroy added 2 commits April 2, 2026 13:59

Update e2e test resources

7517d57

Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/main' into kubeadm-version

eef3ec4

fabriziopandini reviewed Apr 13, 2026

View reviewed changes

	// template defines the template to use for generating the names of the
	// Machine objects.
	// If not defined, it will fallback to `{{ .machineSet.name }}-{{ .random }}`.
	// If the generated name string exceeds 63 characters, it will be trimmed to
	// 58 characters and will
	// get concatenated with a random suffix of length 5.
	// Length of the template string must not exceed 256 characters.
	// The template allows the following variables `.cluster.name`,
	// `.machineSet.name` and `.random`.
	// The variable `.cluster.name` retrieves the name of the cluster object
	// that owns the Machines being created.
	// The variable `.machineSet.name` retrieves the name of the MachineSet
	// object that owns the Machines being created.
	// The variable `.random` is substituted with random alphanumeric string,
	// without vowels, of length 5. This variable is required part of the
	// template. If not provided, validation will fail.
	// +optional
	// +kubebuilder:validation:MinLength=1
	// +kubebuilder:validation:MaxLength=256
	Template string `json:"template,omitempty"`

Conversation

AcidLeroy commented Mar 10, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

k8s-ci-robot commented Mar 10, 2026

Uh oh!

k8s-ci-robot commented Mar 10, 2026

Uh oh!

k8s-ci-robot commented Mar 10, 2026

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

zarcen left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

linux-foundation-easycla bot commented Mar 11, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

neolit123 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

AcidLeroy commented Mar 11, 2026

Uh oh!

AcidLeroy commented Mar 12, 2026

Uh oh!

neolit123 commented Mar 12, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

AcidLeroy commented Mar 19, 2026

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

sbueringer Apr 2, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

sbueringer commented Apr 2, 2026

Uh oh!

sbueringer Apr 2, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

sbueringer Apr 2, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

AcidLeroy commented Mar 10, 2026 •

edited

Loading

linux-foundation-easycla bot commented Mar 11, 2026 •

edited

Loading

neolit123 commented Mar 12, 2026 •

edited

Loading

sbueringer Apr 2, 2026 •

edited

Loading

sbueringer Apr 2, 2026 •

edited

Loading

sbueringer Apr 2, 2026 •

edited

Loading

sbueringer Apr 2, 2026 •

edited

Loading

k8s-ci-robot commented Apr 2, 2026 •

edited

Loading