Skip to content

Rename CA file router-ca to default-ingress-cert #3744

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom
Merged
openshift-merge-robot merged 1 commit into from
Jan 3, 2020
Merged

Rename CA file router-ca to default-ingress-cert #3744

openshift-merge-robot merged 1 commit into from
Jan 3, 2020

Conversation

@jhadvig
Copy link
Member

@jhadvig jhadvig commented Dec 10, 2019 •
edited
Loading

After openshift/console-operator#361 is merged this update needs to be merged as well.

/assign @spadgett

fyi @benjaminapetersen

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the size/XS Denotes a PR that changes 0-9 lines, ignoring generated files. label Dec 10, 2019
@spadgett
Copy link
Member

spadgett commented Dec 10, 2019

hold for openshift/console-operator#361
/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 10, 2019
@spadgett spadgett added this to the v4.4 milestone Dec 10, 2019
@spadgett
Copy link
Member

spadgett commented Dec 10, 2019

Actually, we might be able to merge this now, correct?

@spadgett
Copy link
Member

spadgett commented Dec 10, 2019

/test analyze

@jhadvig
Copy link
Member Author

jhadvig commented Dec 10, 2019

yes, it should be ok, since its a revert of a revert.
@benjaminapetersen thoughts ?

@benjaminapetersen
Copy link
Contributor

benjaminapetersen commented Dec 19, 2019

/retest

failed to initialize the cluster: Cluster operator machine-config is reporting a failure: Failed to resync 0.0.1-2019-12-10-155846 because: timed out waiting for the condition

@benjaminapetersen
Copy link
Contributor

benjaminapetersen commented Dec 19, 2019

/lgtm

Yes this should be good now.

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Dec 19, 2019
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci-robot commented Dec 19, 2019

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: benjaminapetersen, jhadvig

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:

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

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Dec 19, 2019
@spadgett
Copy link
Member

spadgett commented Jan 2, 2020

/hold cancel
/retest
#3847 has fixed the e2e tests

@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 2, 2020
@openshift-merge-robot openshift-merge-robot merged commit ae27d25 into openshift:master Jan 3, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@rhamilto rhamilto Awaiting requested review from rhamilto

1 more reviewer

@benjaminapetersen benjaminapetersen benjaminapetersen approved these changes

Reviewers whose approvals may not affect merge requirements

Assignees

@benjaminapetersen benjaminapetersen

@spadgett spadgett

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. size/XS Denotes a PR that changes 0-9 lines, ignoring generated files.

Projects

None yet

Milestone

v4.4

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants

@jhadvig @spadgett @benjaminapetersen @openshift-ci-robot @openshift-merge-robot