Update gophercloud

[gnufied]

Update gophercloud library.

Fixes https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1731282

[gnufied]

/sig storage

[jsafrane]

Where the gophercloud version comes from? Upstream #73437 (commit 55a8dbcbfbe1833330d88fc67421532d3fbbb066 contains slightly different code. And this PR contains thousands of files that are not in Kubernetes. What is our vendor pruning policy?

[gnufied]

Yes - I brought forward gophercloud version mentioned in - kubernetes/kubernetes#79637 but since upstream has moved to use gomodules, calling it UPSSTREAM: xxx is tricky.

And I needed kubernetes/kubernetes@55a8dbc because it contains necessary changes in kubernetes code to accomodate for version bump.

v0.1.0 of gophercloud seems to have more sane fixes than the SHA referred in dims commit. I can perhaps make this clear and split the commits.

Also about vendor stripping/pruning - I am not sure why is glide not stripping files by scanning the imports. Ideally it should.

[jsafrane]

v0.1.0 of gophercloud seems to have more sane fixes than the SHA referred in dims commit. I can perhaps make this clear and split the commits.

Yes, more obvious commit message would be useful.

Also about vendor stripping/pruning - I am not sure why is glide not stripping files by scanning the imports. Ideally it should.

Ack, I see other deps are not pruned either, so let it be as it is.

Still, this replaces lot of OpenStack code with something that was not tested by us and can bring regressions.

 895 files changed, 70436 insertions(+), 4307 deletions(-)

It's mostly adding support for new APIs, yet I am not sure we have power to retest whole OCP on OSP in 3.11.z timeframe.

[gnufied]

Still, this replaces lot of OpenStack code with something that was not tested by us and can bring regressions.

So the reason we need the entire 0.1.0 release rather than just the cherry-pick of the commit that fixes the issue is because - gophercloud/gophercloud#1408 while fixed the issue, it had a regression. And the fix that fixes the regression had conflict with other related changes. It is my understanding that - reauth. mechanism in gophercloud is quite problematic and suffers from several problems. Only around 0.1.0 release - dust seems to have settled down little bit.

So far our options are:

1. Just roll with this patch. Ask QE to test it and provide affected customer with a hotfix release that includes this patch and ask them to test. If everything works - we are probably fine.

2. Really delve into reauth. mechanism code and make a more targetted fix which hopefully does not have regression that upstream fix had. There are several downsides of this approach:
   a. We will be creating a mini-fork of gophercloud.
   b. We will miss other fixes that were done to library including for reauthentication.
   c. It will not be any less time consuming than option#1.

[jsafrane]

There are also these options:

3. Find acceptable workaround
4. Update OCP to 4.1
5. Update OpenStack to 13

[gnufied]

Just for a quick update - the hotfix build was deployed in customers environment and it was confirmed that, this patch fixes the customer's issue and no regression was found. We should be good to go with this PR.

[jottofar]

/retest

[gnufied]

I am currently waiting for #23620 PR to merge first, so as some of the issues with missing dependencies can be resolved. I will have to update this PR once #23620 merges.

[gageorsburn]

@gnufied Any timeframe on getting conflicts resolved so this can get merged?

[gnufied]

/retest

[jsafrane]

The customer has confirmed it fixes the bug and has no obvious regressions.

/lgtm

[jsafrane]

/retest

[openshift-ci-robot]

@gnufied: The following test failed, say /retest to rerun them all:

Test name	Commit	Details	Rerun command
ci/openshift-jenkins/extended_builds	86385f3	link	/test extended_builds

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard. Please help us cut down on flakes by linking to an open issue when you hit one in your PR.

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.

[gnufied]

The CI for 3.11 branches is broken. @dobbymoodge is working on fixing the CI

[gnufied]

/retest

[dobbymoodge]

/retest

[knobunc]

/approve

[openshift-ci-robot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: gnufied, jsafrane, knobunc

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 [knobunc]

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