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

Remove old api version from the SSP CRD on upgrade #3329

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

orenc1
Copy link
Collaborator

@orenc1 orenc1 commented Mar 6, 2025

Since version 1.10, SSP moved to a new api version - v1beta2.
In latest release, SSP completely removed the old API v1beta1 from their CRD.
This might result in an upgrade issue with OLM, if the cluster has initially started with version 1.9 or below.
This PR removes the old SSP api version v1beta1 from the storedVersions list in the SSP CRD status, to allow a smooth upgrade to 1.14.0.

What this PR does / why we need it:

Reviewer Checklist

Reviewers are supposed to review the PR for every aspect below one by one. To check an item means the PR is either "OK" or "Not Applicable" in terms of that item. All items are supposed to be checked before merging a PR.

  • PR Message
  • Commit Messages
  • How to test
  • Unit Tests
  • Functional Tests
  • User Documentation
  • Developer Documentation
  • Upgrade Scenario
  • Uninstallation Scenario
  • Backward Compatibility
  • Troubleshooting Friendly

Jira Ticket:

https://issues.redhat.com/browse/CNV-57082

Release note:

NONE

@kubevirt-bot kubevirt-bot added the release-note-none Denotes a PR that doesn't merit a release note. label Mar 6, 2025
@kubevirt-bot kubevirt-bot added the dco-signoff: yes Indicates the PR's author has DCO signed all their commits. label Mar 6, 2025
@kubevirt-bot kubevirt-bot requested a review from sradco March 6, 2025 11:57
@orenc1 orenc1 force-pushed the remove_old_ssp_apiversion_crd branch from 2551548 to de7f9e4 Compare March 6, 2025 12:03
Copy link
Collaborator

@nunnatsa nunnatsa left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Added a few comment. I think it's makes sense. I would consider to add a boolean (in the reconciler? not sure where) to not read and parse the CRD again, if it wasn't change.

We're not caching the CRD, so reading it over and over again may be pricey.

Comment on lines 403 to 404
sspCrd := "ssps.ssp.kubevirt.io"
sspApiVersionToRemove := "v1beta1"
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

please make them consts

Comment on lines 1058 to 1061
if !slices.Contains(crd.Status.StoredVersions, removedApiVersion) {
return nil
}
var newStoredVersions []string
for _, ver := range crd.Status.StoredVersions {
if ver == removedApiVersion {
continue
}
newStoredVersions = append(newStoredVersions, ver)
}
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think we can use methods from the slices package, instead of this loop.; e.g.

Suggested change
if !slices.Contains(crd.Status.StoredVersions, removedApiVersion) {
return nil
}
var newStoredVersions []string
for _, ver := range crd.Status.StoredVersions {
if ver == removedApiVersion {
continue
}
newStoredVersions = append(newStoredVersions, ver)
}
i := slices.Index(crd.Status.StoredVersions, removedApiVersion)
if i == -1 {
return nil
}
slices.Delete(crd.Status.StoredVersions, i, i+1)

I think it's cleaner. WDYT?

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

But actually, I think we should try to use json patch here. So maybe the we only need slices.Index: if it -1, we can we're fine. if not, we can build a json patch based on this index.

Comment on lines 1069 to 1072
crd.Status.StoredVersions = newStoredVersions
if err := r.client.Status().Update(req.Ctx, &crd); err != nil {
req.Logger.Error(err, fmt.Sprintf("failed to remove %v from status of CRD %v", removedApiVersion, crdName))
return err
}
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Let's try to do it with json patch

@orenc1 orenc1 force-pushed the remove_old_ssp_apiversion_crd branch from de7f9e4 to 6db5666 Compare March 6, 2025 12:17
@hco-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

hco-bot commented Mar 6, 2025

hco-e2e-operator-sdk-gcp lane succeeded.
/override ci/prow/hco-e2e-operator-sdk-azure
hco-e2e-operator-sdk-gcp lane succeeded.
/override ci/prow/hco-e2e-operator-sdk-aws

@kubevirt-bot
Copy link
Contributor

@hco-bot: Overrode contexts on behalf of hco-bot: ci/prow/hco-e2e-operator-sdk-aws, ci/prow/hco-e2e-operator-sdk-azure

In response to this:

hco-e2e-operator-sdk-gcp lane succeeded.
/override ci/prow/hco-e2e-operator-sdk-azure
hco-e2e-operator-sdk-gcp lane succeeded.
/override ci/prow/hco-e2e-operator-sdk-aws

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.

@hco-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

hco-bot commented Mar 6, 2025

hco-e2e-kv-smoke-gcp lane succeeded.
/override ci/prow/hco-e2e-kv-smoke-azure
hco-e2e-upgrade-prev-operator-sdk-sno-azure lane succeeded.
/override ci/prow/hco-e2e-upgrade-prev-operator-sdk-sno-aws
hco-e2e-upgrade-operator-sdk-aws lane succeeded.
/override ci/prow/hco-e2e-upgrade-operator-sdk-azure
hco-e2e-operator-sdk-gcp lane succeeded.
/override ci/prow/hco-e2e-operator-sdk-azure
hco-e2e-operator-sdk-gcp lane succeeded.
/override ci/prow/hco-e2e-operator-sdk-aws

@kubevirt-bot
Copy link
Contributor

@hco-bot: Overrode contexts on behalf of hco-bot: ci/prow/hco-e2e-kv-smoke-azure, ci/prow/hco-e2e-operator-sdk-aws, ci/prow/hco-e2e-operator-sdk-azure, ci/prow/hco-e2e-upgrade-operator-sdk-azure, ci/prow/hco-e2e-upgrade-prev-operator-sdk-sno-aws

In response to this:

hco-e2e-kv-smoke-gcp lane succeeded.
/override ci/prow/hco-e2e-kv-smoke-azure
hco-e2e-upgrade-prev-operator-sdk-sno-azure lane succeeded.
/override ci/prow/hco-e2e-upgrade-prev-operator-sdk-sno-aws
hco-e2e-upgrade-operator-sdk-aws lane succeeded.
/override ci/prow/hco-e2e-upgrade-operator-sdk-azure
hco-e2e-operator-sdk-gcp lane succeeded.
/override ci/prow/hco-e2e-operator-sdk-azure
hco-e2e-operator-sdk-gcp lane succeeded.
/override ci/prow/hco-e2e-operator-sdk-aws

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.

@hco-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

hco-bot commented Mar 6, 2025

hco-e2e-consecutive-operator-sdk-upgrades-aws lane succeeded.
/override ci/prow/hco-e2e-consecutive-operator-sdk-upgrades-azure
hco-e2e-upgrade-prev-operator-sdk-sno-azure lane succeeded.
/override ci/prow/hco-e2e-upgrade-prev-operator-sdk-sno-aws

@kubevirt-bot
Copy link
Contributor

@hco-bot: Overrode contexts on behalf of hco-bot: ci/prow/hco-e2e-consecutive-operator-sdk-upgrades-azure, ci/prow/hco-e2e-upgrade-prev-operator-sdk-sno-aws

In response to this:

hco-e2e-consecutive-operator-sdk-upgrades-aws lane succeeded.
/override ci/prow/hco-e2e-consecutive-operator-sdk-upgrades-azure
hco-e2e-upgrade-prev-operator-sdk-sno-azure lane succeeded.
/override ci/prow/hco-e2e-upgrade-prev-operator-sdk-sno-aws

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.

@orenc1 orenc1 force-pushed the remove_old_ssp_apiversion_crd branch from 6db5666 to ceed8c4 Compare March 6, 2025 15:36
@coveralls
Copy link
Collaborator

coveralls commented Mar 6, 2025

Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 13749340768

Details

  • 19 of 27 (70.37%) changed or added relevant lines in 1 file are covered.
  • 1 unchanged line in 1 file lost coverage.
  • Overall coverage increased (+0.02%) to 72.084%

Changes Missing Coverage Covered Lines Changed/Added Lines %
controllers/hyperconverged/hyperconverged_controller.go 19 27 70.37%
Files with Coverage Reduction New Missed Lines %
controllers/operands/quickStart.go 1 82.14%
Totals Coverage Status
Change from base Build 13719566325: 0.02%
Covered Lines: 6476
Relevant Lines: 8984

💛 - Coveralls

Copy link
Collaborator

@nunnatsa nunnatsa left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks good!

Added one comment inline.

Comment on lines 1068 to 1078
patchCommand := []map[string]interface{}{
{
"op": "remove",
"path": fmt.Sprintf("/status/storedVersions/%d", versionIndex),
},
}
patchBytes, err := json.Marshal(patchCommand)
if err != nil {
req.Logger.Error(err, "failed to marshal patch")
return err
}
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Since the only dynamic element here is the index, I think it will be more efficient to use string & fmt here. Marshaling the object each time has a higher performance cost. Also, we won't need the error handling.

WDYT about this?

Suggested change
patchCommand := []map[string]interface{}{
{
"op": "remove",
"path": fmt.Sprintf("/status/storedVersions/%d", versionIndex),
},
}
patchBytes, err := json.Marshal(patchCommand)
if err != nil {
req.Logger.Error(err, "failed to marshal patch")
return err
}
patchBytes := []byte(fmt.Sprintf`[{"op":"remove","path":"/status/storedVersions/%d"}]`, versionIndex)

@hco-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

hco-bot commented Mar 6, 2025

hco-e2e-operator-sdk-gcp lane succeeded.
/override ci/prow/hco-e2e-operator-sdk-azure
hco-e2e-operator-sdk-gcp lane succeeded.
/override ci/prow/hco-e2e-operator-sdk-aws

@kubevirt-bot
Copy link
Contributor

@hco-bot: Overrode contexts on behalf of hco-bot: ci/prow/hco-e2e-operator-sdk-aws, ci/prow/hco-e2e-operator-sdk-azure

In response to this:

hco-e2e-operator-sdk-gcp lane succeeded.
/override ci/prow/hco-e2e-operator-sdk-azure
hco-e2e-operator-sdk-gcp lane succeeded.
/override ci/prow/hco-e2e-operator-sdk-aws

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.

@orenc1 orenc1 force-pushed the remove_old_ssp_apiversion_crd branch from ceed8c4 to 038fbce Compare March 6, 2025 17:30
@hco-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

hco-bot commented Mar 6, 2025

hco-e2e-operator-sdk-gcp lane succeeded.
/override ci/prow/hco-e2e-operator-sdk-azure
hco-e2e-operator-sdk-gcp lane succeeded.
/override ci/prow/hco-e2e-operator-sdk-aws

@kubevirt-bot
Copy link
Contributor

@hco-bot: Overrode contexts on behalf of hco-bot: ci/prow/hco-e2e-operator-sdk-aws, ci/prow/hco-e2e-operator-sdk-azure

In response to this:

hco-e2e-operator-sdk-gcp lane succeeded.
/override ci/prow/hco-e2e-operator-sdk-azure
hco-e2e-operator-sdk-gcp lane succeeded.
/override ci/prow/hco-e2e-operator-sdk-aws

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.

@hco-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

hco-bot commented Mar 6, 2025

hco-e2e-operator-sdk-gcp lane succeeded.
/override ci/prow/hco-e2e-operator-sdk-aws

@kubevirt-bot
Copy link
Contributor

@hco-bot: Overrode contexts on behalf of hco-bot: ci/prow/hco-e2e-operator-sdk-aws

In response to this:

hco-e2e-operator-sdk-gcp lane succeeded.
/override ci/prow/hco-e2e-operator-sdk-aws

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.

@hco-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

hco-bot commented Mar 6, 2025

hco-e2e-consecutive-operator-sdk-upgrades-aws lane succeeded.
/override ci/prow/hco-e2e-consecutive-operator-sdk-upgrades-azure

@kubevirt-bot
Copy link
Contributor

@hco-bot: Overrode contexts on behalf of hco-bot: ci/prow/hco-e2e-consecutive-operator-sdk-upgrades-azure

In response to this:

hco-e2e-consecutive-operator-sdk-upgrades-aws lane succeeded.
/override ci/prow/hco-e2e-consecutive-operator-sdk-upgrades-azure

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.

@hco-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

hco-bot commented Mar 6, 2025

hco-e2e-kv-smoke-gcp lane succeeded.
/override ci/prow/hco-e2e-kv-smoke-azure

@kubevirt-bot
Copy link
Contributor

@hco-bot: Overrode contexts on behalf of hco-bot: ci/prow/hco-e2e-kv-smoke-azure

In response to this:

hco-e2e-kv-smoke-gcp lane succeeded.
/override ci/prow/hco-e2e-kv-smoke-azure

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.

@hco-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

hco-bot commented Mar 6, 2025

hco-e2e-kv-smoke-gcp lane succeeded.
/override ci/prow/hco-e2e-kv-smoke-azure

@kubevirt-bot
Copy link
Contributor

@hco-bot: Overrode contexts on behalf of hco-bot: ci/prow/hco-e2e-kv-smoke-azure

In response to this:

hco-e2e-kv-smoke-gcp lane succeeded.
/override ci/prow/hco-e2e-kv-smoke-azure

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.

@hco-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

hco-bot commented Mar 6, 2025

hco-e2e-upgrade-operator-sdk-aws lane succeeded.
/override ci/prow/hco-e2e-upgrade-operator-sdk-azure

@kubevirt-bot
Copy link
Contributor

@hco-bot: Overrode contexts on behalf of hco-bot: ci/prow/hco-e2e-upgrade-operator-sdk-azure

In response to this:

hco-e2e-upgrade-operator-sdk-aws lane succeeded.
/override ci/prow/hco-e2e-upgrade-operator-sdk-azure

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.

@orenc1 orenc1 force-pushed the remove_old_ssp_apiversion_crd branch from 038fbce to 9bd89e8 Compare March 9, 2025 13:46
Copy link
Collaborator

@nunnatsa nunnatsa left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Added two inline comment.

I wonder if we can write the e2e test in golang.

Comment on lines 1058 to 1061
if !slices.Contains(crd.Status.StoredVersions, removedApiVersion) {
return nil
}

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We don't need this. We're doing it in line 1063

Since version 1.10, SSP moved to a new api version - v1beta2.
In latest release, SSP completely removed the old API v1beta1 from their CRD.
This might result in an upgrade issue with OLM, if the cluster has initially started with version 1.9 or below.
This PR removes the old SSP api version v1beta1 from the storedVersions list in the SSP CRD status, to allow a smooth upgrade to 1.14.0.

Signed-off-by: Oren Cohen <[email protected]>
@orenc1 orenc1 force-pushed the remove_old_ssp_apiversion_crd branch from 9bd89e8 to 38564bf Compare March 9, 2025 14:16
Copy link

sonarqubecloud bot commented Mar 9, 2025

@nunnatsa
Copy link
Collaborator

nunnatsa commented Mar 9, 2025

/lgtm
/approve

@kubevirt-bot kubevirt-bot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Mar 9, 2025
@kubevirt-bot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: nunnatsa

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:

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

@kubevirt-bot kubevirt-bot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Mar 9, 2025
@nunnatsa
Copy link
Collaborator

nunnatsa commented Mar 9, 2025

/cherry-pick release-1.14
/cherry-pick release-1.13

@kubevirt-bot
Copy link
Contributor

@nunnatsa: once the present PR merges, I will cherry-pick it on top of release-1.13, release-1.14 in new PRs and assign them to you.

In response to this:

/cherry-pick release-1.14
/cherry-pick release-1.13

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.

@hco-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

hco-bot commented Mar 9, 2025

hco-e2e-operator-sdk-gcp lane succeeded.
/override ci/prow/hco-e2e-operator-sdk-aws
hco-e2e-operator-sdk-gcp lane succeeded.
/override ci/prow/hco-e2e-operator-sdk-azure

@kubevirt-bot
Copy link
Contributor

@hco-bot: Overrode contexts on behalf of hco-bot: ci/prow/hco-e2e-operator-sdk-aws, ci/prow/hco-e2e-operator-sdk-azure

In response to this:

hco-e2e-operator-sdk-gcp lane succeeded.
/override ci/prow/hco-e2e-operator-sdk-aws
hco-e2e-operator-sdk-gcp lane succeeded.
/override ci/prow/hco-e2e-operator-sdk-azure

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.

@hco-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

hco-bot commented Mar 9, 2025

hco-e2e-kv-smoke-gcp lane succeeded.
/override ci/prow/hco-e2e-kv-smoke-azure

@kubevirt-bot
Copy link
Contributor

@hco-bot: Overrode contexts on behalf of hco-bot: ci/prow/hco-e2e-kv-smoke-azure

In response to this:

hco-e2e-kv-smoke-gcp lane succeeded.
/override ci/prow/hco-e2e-kv-smoke-azure

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.

@nunnatsa
Copy link
Collaborator

nunnatsa commented Mar 9, 2025

/retest

@hco-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

hco-bot commented Mar 9, 2025

hco-e2e-kv-smoke-gcp lane succeeded.
/override ci/prow/hco-e2e-kv-smoke-azure

@kubevirt-bot
Copy link
Contributor

@hco-bot: Overrode contexts on behalf of hco-bot: ci/prow/hco-e2e-kv-smoke-azure

In response to this:

hco-e2e-kv-smoke-gcp lane succeeded.
/override ci/prow/hco-e2e-kv-smoke-azure

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.

@orenc1
Copy link
Collaborator Author

orenc1 commented Mar 9, 2025

/retest

@hco-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

hco-bot commented Mar 9, 2025

hco-e2e-operator-sdk-sno-azure lane succeeded.
/override ci/prow/hco-e2e-operator-sdk-sno-aws

@kubevirt-bot
Copy link
Contributor

@hco-bot: Overrode contexts on behalf of hco-bot: ci/prow/hco-e2e-operator-sdk-sno-aws

In response to this:

hco-e2e-operator-sdk-sno-azure lane succeeded.
/override ci/prow/hco-e2e-operator-sdk-sno-aws

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.

Copy link

openshift-ci bot commented Mar 9, 2025

@orenc1: The following tests failed, say /retest to rerun all failed tests or /retest-required to rerun all mandatory failed tests:

Test name Commit Details Required Rerun command
ci/prow/hco-e2e-operator-sdk-aws 38564bf link true /test hco-e2e-operator-sdk-aws
ci/prow/hco-e2e-operator-sdk-sno-aws 38564bf link false /test hco-e2e-operator-sdk-sno-aws
ci/prow/hco-e2e-upgrade-prev-operator-sdk-aws 38564bf link true /test hco-e2e-upgrade-prev-operator-sdk-aws
ci/prow/hco-e2e-upgrade-prev-operator-sdk-sno-aws 38564bf link false /test hco-e2e-upgrade-prev-operator-sdk-sno-aws
ci/prow/hco-e2e-consecutive-operator-sdk-upgrades-aws 38564bf link true /test hco-e2e-consecutive-operator-sdk-upgrades-aws
ci/prow/hco-e2e-upgrade-operator-sdk-sno-aws 38564bf link false /test hco-e2e-upgrade-operator-sdk-sno-aws
ci/prow/hco-e2e-upgrade-operator-sdk-aws 38564bf link true /test hco-e2e-upgrade-operator-sdk-aws
ci/prow/hco-e2e-upgrade-operator-sdk-sno-azure 38564bf link false /test hco-e2e-upgrade-operator-sdk-sno-azure
ci/prow/hco-e2e-upgrade-prev-operator-sdk-azure 38564bf link true /test hco-e2e-upgrade-prev-operator-sdk-azure
ci/prow/hco-e2e-upgrade-prev-operator-sdk-sno-azure 38564bf link false /test hco-e2e-upgrade-prev-operator-sdk-sno-azure
ci/prow/hco-e2e-upgrade-operator-sdk-azure 38564bf link true /test hco-e2e-upgrade-operator-sdk-azure

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard.

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.

@hco-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

hco-bot commented Mar 9, 2025

hco-e2e-consecutive-operator-sdk-upgrades-azure lane succeeded.
/override ci/prow/hco-e2e-consecutive-operator-sdk-upgrades-aws

@kubevirt-bot
Copy link
Contributor

@hco-bot: Overrode contexts on behalf of hco-bot: ci/prow/hco-e2e-consecutive-operator-sdk-upgrades-aws

In response to this:

hco-e2e-consecutive-operator-sdk-upgrades-azure lane succeeded.
/override ci/prow/hco-e2e-consecutive-operator-sdk-upgrades-aws

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.

@orenc1
Copy link
Collaborator Author

orenc1 commented Mar 10, 2025

/retest

@orenc1
Copy link
Collaborator Author

orenc1 commented Mar 10, 2025

this fix can't work on main and 1.14. need to do it at 1.13 when v1beta1 still exists on the SSP CRD.
closing in favor of #3332

@orenc1 orenc1 closed this Mar 10, 2025
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. dco-signoff: yes Indicates the PR's author has DCO signed all their commits. lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. release-note-none Denotes a PR that doesn't merit a release note. size/M
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants