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

Merge upstream tag v1.2.0 #86

Merged
merged 65 commits into from
Jan 4, 2021

Conversation

jmrodri
Copy link
Contributor

@jmrodri jmrodri commented Dec 16, 2020

Merge upstream tag v1.2.0 

Operator SDK v1.2.0

Merge executed via ./UPSTREAM-MERGE.sh v1.2.0 upstream master

Overwritten conflicts:
.gitignore
Makefile

camilamacedo86 and others added 30 commits October 19, 2020 10:00
**Description of the change:**
centralize the code to manage the prerequisites to install OLM and Prometheus which are equals for all e2e tests

**Motivation for the change:**
- maintainability
- reusability 
- remove code duplications across the e2e tests
* Deployment first commit

* Deployment tests for all functions

* Deployment tests for all functions updates

* Deployment tests for all functions
**Description of the change:**
- Upgrade kb commit from f7a3b65dd250 to c993a2a221fe
- Upgrade controller-runtime version from `v0.6.2` to `v0.6.3`. More info: https://github.com/kubernetes-sigs/controller-runtime/releases/tag/v0.6.3

**Motivation for the change:**
- Address bugfixes done in Kubebuilder so far
- Solve tech-debts
- Keep the projects aligned.
Modify `olm-status-descriptor-test` to not check the presence of
`status` field in CR, instead validate only if status-descriptors
are present in owned CRDs.
* Service test
* Service test refined
* Update internal/olm/operator/registry/configmap/service_test.go
Co-authored-by: Camila Macedo <cmacedo@redhat.com>
…4086)

* .cncf-maintainers: auto-generate expanded maintainers file for CNCF maintainers list

* cncf-maintainers: fail generation if alias is not found
…found (#4089)

Co-authored-by: Eric Stroczynski <estroczy@redhat.com>
* update scorecard docs

* update to mention kustomize files location

Co-authored-by: jmccormick2001 <djm76262@gmail.com>
…125)

Co-authored-by: jmccormick2001 <djm76262@gmail.com>
* Bump operator-framework/api to v0.3.18

* Bump operator-framework/api to v0.3.20
Co-authored-by: jmccormick2001 <djm76262@gmail.com>
@jmrodri
Copy link
Contributor Author

jmrodri commented Dec 17, 2020

/hold

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. label Dec 17, 2020
@jmrodri
Copy link
Contributor Author

jmrodri commented Dec 17, 2020

you can extract the operator-sdk binary from the sdk image built by the PR, for example,

docker create registry.build01.ci.openshift.org/ci-op-nkc3fx06/stable:operator-sdk # returns a SHA

# use the SHA from above to reference the container
docker cp 2270a139c02a5e3d43cc0be735622a5466267ad01d76fd0d0c938ce3c0fd3ff8:/user/local/bin/operator-sdk /tmp/operator-sdk

you will now have the operator-sdk binaries

ansible-runner==1.3.4 \
ansible-runner-http==1.0.0 \
openshift~=0.10.0 \
ansible~=2.9 \
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I know we're just merging commit wholesale but this needs to be pinned to 2.9.15 (see operator-framework/operator-sdk#4321). We can either wait for v1.2.1 or v1.3. Thoughts @jmrodri?

/ping @asmacdo

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Those aren't being used downstream. I probably need to compare the files on release/ansible

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@estroz I've compared the 2. The downstream has its own dockerfiles https://github.com/openshift/ocp-release-operator-sdk/tree/master/release I usually just compare them to see if there's anything significant that needs to be brought over. The versions of ansible etc, are all controlled by the packages in the downstream repo which are up to date.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Cool, resolved.

@emmajiafan
Copy link
Contributor

@jmrodri I check the operatorsdk version is :./operator-sdk version
operator-sdk version: "9762a774", commit: "9762a774472487cd72784cf0e591e6cf44fc09d4", kubernetes version: "v1.18.8", go version: "go1.15.5", GOOS: "linux", GOARCH: "amd64". It is not "ocp4.7" or "1.2.0". So is it the expected result?

Copy link
Contributor

@estroz estroz left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

/lgtm

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Dec 17, 2020
Since we are now patching the Makefile with the correct version. We
shouldn't be passing in a new version from the Dockerfiles.
@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot removed the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Dec 17, 2020
@jmrodri
Copy link
Contributor Author

jmrodri commented Dec 17, 2020

/test ci/prow/images

@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

@jmrodri: The specified target(s) for /test were not found.
The following commands are available to trigger jobs:

  • /test e2e-aws-ansible
  • /test e2e-aws-helm
  • /test images
  • /test sanity
  • /test unit

Use /test all to run all jobs.

In response to this:

/test ci/prow/images

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.

@jmrodri
Copy link
Contributor Author

jmrodri commented Dec 17, 2020

/test images

@jmrodri
Copy link
Contributor Author

jmrodri commented Dec 18, 2020

@emmajiafan not sure why the version isn't getting set. I updated the dockerfiles in this PR to set it directly. We could write a bug against it and address it later. I feel like this PR might be using cached images. Please try to test what you can

@emmajiafan
Copy link
Contributor

@jmrodri Ok, will open a bug to trace it. And this pr merge a lot of codes ,so I will do a regression test about it and will cost about 2 days.

@jmrodri
Copy link
Contributor Author

jmrodri commented Dec 18, 2020

@emmajiafan that is expected. It's a full 1.2.0 release from upstream.

@camilamacedo86
Copy link
Contributor

/approve
/lgtm

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Dec 21, 2020
@emmajiafan
Copy link
Contributor

emmajiafan commented Dec 22, 2020

/lgtm
/approve

@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: camilamacedo86, emmajiafan, estroz, jmrodri

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 [camilamacedo86,estroz,jmrodri]

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

@jmrodri
Copy link
Contributor Author

jmrodri commented Jan 4, 2021

/hold cancel

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot removed the do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. label Jan 4, 2021
@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest

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

1 similar comment
@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest

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

@openshift-merge-robot openshift-merge-robot merged commit 7cc6f20 into openshift:master Jan 4, 2021
@jmrodri jmrodri deleted the v1.2.0-rebase-master branch February 13, 2021 17:34
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