fix: remove vendoring from this repo

[jdtuhui]

What type of PR is this?

/kind bug

What this PR does / why we need it:

Remove vendor folder, Use go.mod to download dependent code

Which issue(s) this PR fixes:

Fixes #
#760

Special notes for your reviewer:

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?

[k8s-ci-robot]

Adding the "do-not-merge/release-note-label-needed" label because no release-note block was detected, please follow our release note process to remove it.

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-sigs/prow repository.

[linux-foundation-easycla]

• ❌ - login: @jdtuhui . The commit (d071045) is not authorized under a signed CLA. Please click here to be authorized. For further assistance with EasyCLA, please submit a support request ticket.

[k8s-ci-robot]

Welcome @jdtuhui!

It looks like this is your first PR to kubernetes-sigs/scheduler-plugins 🎉. Please refer to our pull request process documentation to help your PR have a smooth ride to approval.

You will be prompted by a bot to use commands during the review process. Do not be afraid to follow the prompts! It is okay to experiment. Here is the bot commands documentation.

You can also check if kubernetes-sigs/scheduler-plugins has its own contribution guidelines.

You may want to refer to our testing guide if you run into trouble with your tests not passing.

If you are having difficulty getting your pull request seen, please follow the recommended escalation practices. Also, for tips and tricks in the contribution process you may want to read the Kubernetes contributor cheat sheet. We want to make sure your contribution gets all the attention it needs!

Thank you, and welcome to Kubernetes. 😃

[k8s-ci-robot]

Hi @jdtuhui. Thanks for your PR.

I'm waiting for a kubernetes-sigs member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with /ok-to-test on its own line. Until that is done, I will not automatically test new commits in this PR, but the usual testing commands by org members will still work. Regular contributors should join the org to skip this step.

Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the ok-to-test label.

I understand the commands that are listed here.

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-sigs/prow repository.

[netlify]

✅ Deploy Preview for kubernetes-sigs-scheduler-plugins canceled.

Name	Link
🔨 Latest commit	d071045
🔍 Latest deploy log	https://app.netlify.com/sites/kubernetes-sigs-scheduler-plugins/deploys/66743d0d6fa1e000084deea9

[k8s-ci-robot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: jdtuhui
Once this PR has been reviewed and has the lgtm label, please assign ffromani for approval. For more information see the Kubernetes Code Review Process.

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• OWNERS

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

[jaypipes]

@Huang-Wei @zwpaper thoughts on this PR? :)

[googs1025]

@jdtuhui we should fix EasyCLA first.
Also, I think this is not a kind bug classification, but a cleanup classification, please let me know if I am wrong.

[googs1025]

/remove-kind bug
/kind cleanup

[googs1025]

/ok-to-test

[k8s-ci-robot]

@jdtuhui: The following tests failed, say /retest to rerun all failed tests or /retest-required to rerun all mandatory failed tests:

Test name	Commit	Details	Required	Rerun command
pull-scheduler-plugins-unit-test-master	d071045	link	true	/test pull-scheduler-plugins-unit-test-master
pull-scheduler-plugins-integration-test-master	d071045	link	true	/test pull-scheduler-plugins-integration-test-master
pull-scheduler-plugins-verify	d071045	link	true	/test pull-scheduler-plugins-verify

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.

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-sigs/prow repository. I understand the commands that are listed here.

[Huang-Wei]

We used to add vendor/ intentionally b/c of some code (zz_openapi*.go) are excluded in git, but needed to make codegen functional. So it ends up developer having to locally install necessary toolkit to do codegen, which is quite cumbersome.

But due to recent refactoring on codegen scripts (both this repo and upstream), those zz_openapi*.go might not be needed, and hence we can get rid of the whole vendor/ folder.

cc @zwpaper @denkensk @ffromani

[ffromani]

We used to add vendor/ intentionally b/c of some code (zz_openapi*.go) are excluded in git, but needed to make codegen functional. So it ends up developer having to locally install necessary toolkit to do codegen, which is quite cumbersome.

But due to recent refactoring on codegen scripts (both this repo and upstream), those zz_openapi*.go might not be needed, and hence we can get rid of the whole vendor/ folder.

cc @zwpaper @denkensk @ffromani

I for myself I don't have strong opinions on the matter. If there is user demand to remove vendor/ and we have options projectwise to do so, then why not?

[k8s-ci-robot]

PR needs rebase.

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-sigs/prow repository.

[zwpaper]

I would prefer dropping the vendor/ dir if we do not need it for codegen anymore, that would reduce unnecessary changes for PRs, and we can focus more on our core logic.