Skip to content

Conversation

@relyt0925
Copy link
Contributor

@relyt0925 relyt0925 commented Dec 1, 2021

the repo does not yet have a v1beta1 version. We need to keep it v1alpha4 for now

Fixes:

  • Properly sets the infrastructureRef for IBM Cloud clusters. Previously it was inaccurately getting set to v1beta1
  • Properly reconciles the IBMCloud infrastructure references so all downstream components roll out in the cluster appropriately

@relyt0925 relyt0925 changed the title Ibm cloud fixes set ibmcloud capi components to proper v1alpha4 version and properly reconcile infrastructure resource for ibmcloud Dec 1, 2021
@netlify
Copy link

netlify bot commented Dec 1, 2021

✔️ Deploy Preview for hypershift-docs ready!

🔨 Explore the source changes: 1087321

🔍 Inspect the deploy log: https://app.netlify.com/sites/hypershift-docs/deploys/61a7931b8f96630007de4b58

😎 Browse the preview: https://deploy-preview-728--hypershift-docs.netlify.app

@sjenning
Copy link
Contributor

sjenning commented Dec 1, 2021

/hold

requires #719 to merge then rebase

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. label Dec 1, 2021
@sjenning
Copy link
Contributor

sjenning commented Dec 1, 2021

/hold cancel

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot removed the do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. label Dec 1, 2021

// reconciliation strips TypeMeta. We repopulate the static values since they are necessary for
// downstream reconciliation of the CAPI Cluster resource.
awsCluster.TypeMeta = metav1.TypeMeta{
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

if this is being stripped how is this working atm though?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

it's not working for IBM Cloud. It only works for AWS because it happens to be at v1beta1

// downstream reconciliation of the CAPI Cluster resource.
awsCluster.TypeMeta = metav1.TypeMeta{
Kind: "AWSCluster",
APIVersion: capiawsv1.GroupVersion.String(),
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

It actually looks fine in my current cluster

  infrastructureRef:
    apiVersion: infrastructure.cluster.x-k8s.io/v1beta1
    kind: AWSCluster
    name: agl
    namespace: clusters-agl

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We use a gvk find previously

Copy link
Contributor Author

@relyt0925 relyt0925 Dec 1, 2021

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

it always matches v1beta1 if you use gvk find and doesn't properly support multiple versions (AKA IBMCloud clusters being at v1alpha1 but AWS cluster CRDs being at v1beta1)

…reconcile infrastructure resource for ibmcloud
@enxebre
Copy link
Member

enxebre commented Dec 2, 2021

/lgtm
/approve

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Dec 2, 2021
@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Dec 2, 2021

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: enxebre, relyt0925

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 openshift-ci bot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Dec 2, 2021
@openshift-merge-robot openshift-merge-robot merged commit b268147 into openshift:main Dec 2, 2021
hardys pushed a commit to hardys/hypershift that referenced this pull request Dec 8, 2021
Since openshift#728 and openshift#719 the None platform support added via openshift#630
is broken, since there is no infraCR for None platform
hardys pushed a commit to hardys/hypershift that referenced this pull request Dec 8, 2021
Since openshift#728 and openshift#719 the None platform support added via openshift#630
is broken, since there is no infraCR for None platform
tsorya pushed a commit to tsorya/hypershift that referenced this pull request Dec 9, 2021
Since openshift#728 and openshift#719 the None platform support added via openshift#630
is broken, since there is no infraCR for None platform
hardys pushed a commit to hardys/hypershift that referenced this pull request Dec 9, 2021
Since openshift#728 and openshift#719 the None platform support added via openshift#630
is broken, since there is no infraCR for None platform
rmohr pushed a commit to rmohr/hypershift that referenced this pull request Dec 13, 2021
Since openshift#728 and openshift#719 the None platform support added via openshift#630
is broken, since there is no infraCR for None platform
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.

4 participants