OKD-259: Bump openshift/api and add support for OKD featureset specific CRDs

[jatinsu]

Vendor changes made here to add support for the OKD featureset

[openshift-ci-robot]

@jatinsu: This pull request references OKD-259 which is a valid jira issue.

Warning: The referenced jira issue has an invalid target version for the target branch this PR targets: expected the epic to target the "4.22.0" version, but no target version was set.

Details

In response to this:

Vendor changes made here to add support for the OKD featureset

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 openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository.

[jatinsu]

/test e2e-aws-pre-release-ossm e2e-gcp-operator okd-scos-images

[jatinsu]

/test e2e-aws-pre-release-ossm

[jatinsu]

/test e2e-aws-pre-release-ossm

[jatinsu]

@Miciah Would you mind taking a look at this and giving a approval? Thank you!

[Miciah]

@jatinsu, I'll add this PR to the team's review list. Does OKD also need #1272?

[alebedev87]

@jatinsu: you added the installation of 00-custom-resource-definition-OKD.yaml but it's missing in manifests/ directory.

[jatinsu]

@jatinsu: you added the installation of 00-custom-resource-definition-OKD.yaml but it's missing in manifests/ directory.

I was a bit confused on this since all other featuresets have installations of their respective crds but these crds are all also missing in the manifests/ directory. Seems like this isn't needed anymore? Should I remove my addition in this case?

[Miciah]

/assign

[Prashanth684]

@jatinsu, I'll add this PR to the team's review list. Does OKD also need #1272?

we will have to revisit #1272 as the person who was working on it is not involved in the effort anymore - but it has nothing to do with this effort and can be ignored for now.

[Miciah]

I was a bit confused on this since all other featuresets have installations of their respective crds but these crds are all also missing in the manifests/ directory. Seems like this isn't needed anymore? Should I remove my addition in this case?

If I understand correctly, we do not need these changes now, but we will need them next time we add a featuregated API field in the IngressController CRD.

For example, fdb6215 bumped openshift/api to a version that had a featuregated IngressController.spec.endpointPublishingStrategy.loadBalancer.providerParameters.aws.networkingLoadBalancer.subnets API field. Adding this featuregated API field resulted in having multiple variants of the CRD:

• manifests/00-custom-resource-definition-CustomNoUpgrade.yaml
• manifests/00-custom-resource-definition-DevPreviewNoUpgrade.yaml
• manifests/00-custom-resource-definition-TechPreviewNoUpgrade.yaml
• manifests/00-custom-resource-definition.yaml

Subsequently, 48f0439 bumped openshift/api to a version in which none of the API fields were featuregated, and so all the variants were removed, leaving only manifests/00-custom-resource-definition.yaml.

And now there is an OKD variant for CRDs generally, so if we did have a featuregated API field in the IngressController CRD specifically, we would need to account for that variant as well.

So for this PR, there should be no new files under manifests/. However, with this PR merged, the next PR that adds a featuregated API field will also get the appropriate manifests/00-custom-resource-definition-OKD.yaml variant along with the other variants.

I think it is appropriate to merge this PR now. Otherwise, the next time we add a featuregated API field, we will need to update hack/update-generated-crd.sh and hack/verify-generated-crd.sh then to handle the OKD variant—and most likely we would forget to do so and waste time figuring out why things broke on OKD.

That said,
/approve
Please let me know if you disagree.

[openshift-ci]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: Miciah

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Details

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• OWNERS [Miciah]

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

[Miciah]

I do request that you refer to the Jira ticket in the commit message and include a brief description of the changes (consistent with upstream Kubernetes commit message guidelines).

[jatinsu]

Please let me know if you disagree.

No disagreement here, the missing manifests makes a lot more sense to me now. Thanks for explaining!

I do request that you refer to the Jira ticket in the commit message and include a brief description of the changes (consistent with upstream Kubernetes commit message guidelines).

Just did. Thanks for pointing this out!

[openshift-ci]

@jatinsu: 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
ci/prow/e2e-aws-pre-release-ossm	c017fb3	link	false	/test e2e-aws-pre-release-ossm

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard.

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.

[Prashanth684]

/test okd-scos-images

[jatinsu]

/test e2e-aws-operator

[Prashanth684]

/lgtm

[Prashanth684]

/verified by @jatinsu

[openshift-ci-robot]

@Prashanth684: This PR has been marked as verified by @jatinsu.

Details

In response to this:

/verified by @jatinsu

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 openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository.

[openshift-ci-robot]

/retest-required

Remaining retests: 0 against base HEAD 636df55 and 2 for PR HEAD b735dc7 in total

[openshift-ci-robot]

/retest-required

Remaining retests: 0 against base HEAD c35fab4 and 1 for PR HEAD b735dc7 in total