Conversation
Signed-off-by: Ashley Davis <ashley.davis@jetstack.io>
|
I will add 1.24 tests against release-1.8 (and possibly release-1.7) in a separate PR to reduce the scope of this. |
SgtCoDFish
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I've got a few suggestions - I can't request changes or LGTM because I'm the original author of the PR though 😁
config/plugins.yaml
Outdated
| cert-manager/website: | ||
| # cert-manager/website uses master branch for 'current' version and the | ||
| # release-next branch for the 'next' version | ||
| release-next: v1.8 | ||
| master: v1.7 | ||
| release-next: v1.9 | ||
| master: v1.8 | ||
| # Older versions are archived into named release branches | ||
| release-1.7: v1.7 | ||
| release-1.6: v1.6 | ||
| release-1.5: v1.5 | ||
| release-1.4: v1.4 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
suggestion: these branches don't exist on the cert-manager website any more, I deleted them all because they were unused. I didn't think that they might be referenced here.
Should we remove the milestone_applier stuff for the website? It seems harmless to do that in this PR too.
| - name: ndots | ||
| value: "1" | ||
|
|
||
| - name: ci-cert-manager-previous-e2e-v1-19 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
suggestion: there's a difference here between how this test - ci-cert-manager-previous-e2e-v1-19 - is being run and how ci-cert-manager-e2e-feature-gates-disabled-v1-19-previous is being run below.
This one uses runner devel/ci-run-e2e.sh while the feature-gates-disabled one uses make.
Should all e2es should use make on release-1.8 and later? If we updated that now it's one less thing to do after we release 1.9.
| - name: pull-cert-manager-e2e-v1-19 | ||
| context: pull-cert-manager-e2e-v1-19 | ||
| always_run: false |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
suggestion: later in this file there's pull-cert-manager-make-e2e-v1-23 for release-1.8. Would the ideal long-term goal be that all e2es from release-1.8 and later run with make, meaning we wouldn't add release-1.8 for tests which use devel/ci-run-e2e.sh?
Maybe that's one for a future PR though!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
For this, my thinking was that we'd need to have two versions of each test, one for release-1.7 with Bazel, one with release-1.8 with make and since the presubmits will only be run a few times max to get some bug fixes merged, it shouldn't really matter whether it uses make or Bazel.
However, perhaps it would cause problems down the line that the periodics use make whilst the presubmits use Bazel.. I've had an issue with those being different for periodics and presubmits against master, where a PR for a flake for make periodic could not be tested by a presubmit because there was only a Bazel presubmit for that version of Kubernetes.
So I will add make version for 1.8 in this PR
Co-authored-by: Ashley Davis <ashley.davis@jetstack.io> Signed-off-by: irbekrm <irbekrm@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Ashley Davis <ashley.davis@jetstack.io> Signed-off-by: irbekrm <irbekrm@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: irbekrm <irbekrm@gmail.com>
As older branches were removed from website and milestones aren't really used there Signed-off-by: irbekrm <irbekrm@gmail.com>
Thanks @SgtCoDFish I've addressed the comments, lmk if it makes sense and I might fish for another lgmt from someone- conscious that it might be taking too much people's time to ask a third person try to understand which test should run with make and which with Bazel 😅 |
wallrj
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think this all looks ok.
/lgtm
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: SgtCoDFish, wallrj The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. The pull request process is described here DetailsNeeds approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
|
@SgtCoDFish: Updated the following 2 configmaps:
DetailsIn 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/test-infra repository. |
This PR makes the changes necessary to update Prow config post-1.8 release.
This is a little different from the last time we did it i.e #605 because: