🐛 Fix SubResourceCreateOptions signature in subresource client

[Fricounet]

The current signature of SubResourceCreateOptions does not match the interface definition of SubResourceCreateOption because of a typo in the method ApplyToSubResourceCreate name. This PR fixes the name.
It also modifies the existing test to actually use the options provided so that if an error like this were to occur again, it would fail to compile.

[k8s-ci-robot]

Welcome @Fricounet!

It looks like this is your first PR to kubernetes-sigs/controller-runtime 🎉. Please refer to our pull request process documentation to help your PR have a smooth ride to approval.

You will be prompted by a bot to use commands during the review process. Do not be afraid to follow the prompts! It is okay to experiment. Here is the bot commands documentation.

You can also check if kubernetes-sigs/controller-runtime has its own contribution guidelines.

You may want to refer to our testing guide if you run into trouble with your tests not passing.

If you are having difficulty getting your pull request seen, please follow the recommended escalation practices. Also, for tips and tricks in the contribution process you may want to read the Kubernetes contributor cheat sheet. We want to make sure your contribution gets all the attention it needs!

Thank you, and welcome to Kubernetes. 😃

[k8s-ci-robot]

Hi @Fricounet. 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.

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.

[alvaroaleman]

thanks

[k8s-ci-robot]

LGTM label has been added.

Git tree hash: 945b51a8d284603d1f8464c24d72c3a3128036e8

[k8s-ci-robot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: alvaroaleman, Fricounet

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 [alvaroaleman]

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]

@Fricounet: 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-controller-runtime-apidiff	55c4331	link	false	/test pull-controller-runtime-apidiff

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/test-infra repository. I understand the commands that are listed here.

[Fricounet]

@alvaroaleman it seems like the api-diff test failed. Does it mean that I should modify the PR title to be a breaking change? Or is it fine to have it failed for a bugfix? Because at the moment, the current API is simply broken for users 🤔

[alvaroaleman]

@Fricounet its fine given this is a bugfix and I can not imagine that someone manually called this method before, which would be the only situation where this would break someone

[sbueringer]

No strong opinion, but should this be cherry-picked? Looks like before this PR the option was basically useless

[alvaroaleman]

No strong opinion, but should this be cherry-picked? Looks like before this PR the option was basically useless

I'd leave it unpicked for the moment as in theory it could be breaking and given that no one even noticed this, it doesn't appear to be widely used.