Skip to content
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.

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

Mismatch kube-open api refs #483

Closed
Tracked by #507
snirkop89 opened this issue Dec 5, 2022 · 3 comments · Fixed by #502
Closed
Tracked by #507

Mismatch kube-open api refs #483

snirkop89 opened this issue Dec 5, 2022 · 3 comments · Fixed by #502
Assignees

Comments

@snirkop89
Copy link

Hi,

I'm using mpi-operator v2 in my project, and I also need training-operator TF and Pytorch jobs.
After upgrading training-operator to v1.5, and updating the kube-openapi module to a working reference,
now the mpi-operator returns this errors:
../../go/pkg/mod/github.com/kubeflow/mpi-operator/v2@v2.0.0-20220831182455-5be2a42bf5af/pkg/apis/kubeflow/v2beta1/openapi_generated.go:44:11: cannot use spec.Schema{…} (value of type "github.com/go-openapi/spec".Schema) as type "k8s.io/kube-openapi/pkg/validation/spec".Schema in struct literal

At first I had this line:
k8s.io/kube-openapi => k8s.io/kube-openapi v0.0.0-20210113233702-8566a335510f
After the update
k8s.io/kube-openapi => k8s.io/kube-openapi v0.0.0-20220124234850-424119656bbf

It looks like an issue or either one of them. Either use the mpi v2 or the tf 1.5.
We don't want to upgrade to mpi-v1 due to workloads in scale.

Are you aware of it? Is there anything that can be done?

@alculquicondor
Copy link
Collaborator

We can update the dependency in this repo.

Could you open a PR?

@snirkop89
Copy link
Author

Sure, I will.

@tenzen-y
Copy link
Member

tenzen-y commented Jan 6, 2023

I will upgrade all dependencies after I cleaned up the repository.

ref: #486
/assign

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

3 participants