-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 791
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
Migrate jobs away from gs://kubernetes-release-dev #846
Comments
https://cs.k8s.io/?q=latest-green.txt&i=nope&files=&repos= It looks like |
@spiffxp -- Carrying the convo from https://kubernetes.slack.com/archives/CJH2GBF7Y/p1590088139329000... Yep, we've identified this as a need, but slowed down because the Prow bits weren't in place yet (ref: https://kubernetes.slack.com/archives/CJH2GBF7Y/p1590088139329000). So, broad strokes/first guess on a plan:
Again, that's an incredible rough draft, but let me know what you think. |
(I should assign myself here as well) |
FYI: @kubernetes/release-engineering @kubernetes/ci-signal |
Are there any strong opinions about:
Existing buckets I want to consider in this context are:
|
I somewhat wish the -pull, -dev buckets mapped directly to the ci-, periodic-, pull- test name pattern, but that's probably non-trivial to resolve? |
Opened #1110 with my proposal |
Relative to my comment earlier in the issue and pulling discussion from the PR closer to this comment:
...makes sense to me and explains the "-dev" as synonym/summary name for the ci-, periodic-, pull- tests' artifacts. Dev as meaning not prod is logical. |
kubernetes/test-infra#19483 (comment) - points out there are many references to I'd like to scope this issue to just the job configs in kubernetes/test-infra. We can consider this closable once all job configs have migrated to reference k8s-release-dev (except those necessary to maintain kubernetes-release-dev during deprecation window). |
/milestone v1.21 |
/priority important-longterm |
Opened kubernetes/test-infra#20885
|
kubernetes/test-infra#20964 (comment) Analysis from a while ago:
We should either sync (one-way), move dl.k8s.io and other things aggressively (post-v1.21), or make it really really clear when and why this happens |
/milestone v1.22 |
Opened #2291 with a script I've been using to keep an eye on the delta between gs://k8s-release-dev and gs://kubernetes-release-dev |
I'm going to consider this closed if kubernetes/test-infra#22840 lands without breaking anything I've opened #2318 as the umbrella issue to track "what else besides jobs" |
/close I have a timeline of what landed / broke / fixed when: #2318 (comment) |
@spiffxp: Closing this issue. In response to this:
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. |
There are a number of jobs that assume they have write access to
gs://kubernetes-release-dev
, and then a bunch of other jobs that assume they should be downloading builds fromgs://kubernetes-release-dev
Unfortunately, this bucket will not allow non-google.com service accounts to write to it. We need to use a new bucket, and develop a plan for using it that doesn't involve all jobs being cut over in lock step.
I am pretty sure this overlaps with ongoing work by the release-engineering subproject
ref: #752, #841 - followup to #830
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: