Skip to content

Conversation

@enxebre
Copy link
Member

@enxebre enxebre commented Dec 14, 2021

Drop unnecessary platform check.

@netlify
Copy link

netlify bot commented Dec 14, 2021

✔️ Deploy Preview for hypershift-docs ready!

🔨 Explore the source changes: 29a256e

🔍 Inspect the deploy log: https://app.netlify.com/sites/hypershift-docs/deploys/61b88772cd01630009b070cf

😎 Browse the preview: https://deploy-preview-782--hypershift-docs.netlify.app

@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Dec 14, 2021

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: enxebre

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 requested review from csrwng and ironcladlou December 14, 2021 12:01
@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Dec 14, 2021
@enxebre enxebre force-pushed the reduce-platform-skew branch from 29a256e to 179136d Compare December 14, 2021 12:02
@enxebre enxebre force-pushed the reduce-platform-skew branch from 179136d to 1c8bae0 Compare December 14, 2021 13:09
@sjenning
Copy link
Contributor

This change assumes that hyperv1.PlatformType enum is a subset (or equal) to configv1.PlatformType enum right?

Not saying it is a bad assumption. Just want to make sure it is one we are intentional about.

@enxebre
Copy link
Member Author

enxebre commented Dec 14, 2021

This change assumes that hyperv1.PlatformType enum is a subset (or equal) to configv1.PlatformType enum right?

Right. I think it's a fair assumption from a domain space pov and the fact we have different types for it is an implementation detail we choose for programming convenience, let me know if you think otherwise.

@enxebre
Copy link
Member Author

enxebre commented Dec 14, 2021

/test e2e-aws

@sjenning
Copy link
Contributor

/lgtm

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Dec 14, 2021
@openshift-bot
Copy link

/retest-required

Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes.

3 similar comments
@openshift-bot
Copy link

/retest-required

Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes.

@openshift-bot
Copy link

/retest-required

Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes.

@openshift-bot
Copy link

/retest-required

Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes.

@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Dec 15, 2021

@enxebre: all tests passed!

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/test-infra repository. I understand the commands that are listed here.

@openshift-merge-robot openshift-merge-robot merged commit c16455d into openshift:main Dec 15, 2021
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