-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 363
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
fix: update generate_versions.go #2252
Closed
Closed
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm afraid we'll have to branch as before
v0.7.0
, the file was in fact at/manifests/release/kustomization.yaml
: https://github.com/kubernetes-sigs/metrics-server/blob/v0.6.4/manifests/release/kustomization.yamlwe started using v0.7.0 in 4.16, so we can branch on that.
Or fallback to the other path on a 404, as you want :)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I didn't check, but maybe we could add a VERSION file in our downstream?
syncbot should know the tag, we could just ask to put it there...
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Ah! That makes sense, I missed this! This will definitely break jobs on
<4.16
PRs, true. This sounds like a good long-term approach, but would adding a conditional for checking both paths suffice here?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yes let's branch to unblock the CI, we'll try the other approach later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Just to confirm, if https://github.com/openshift/release/blob/master/ci-operator/config/openshift/cluster-monitoring-operator/openshift-cluster-monitoring-operator-release-4.16.yaml and https://github.com/openshift/release/blob/master/ci-operator/config/openshift/cluster-monitoring-operator/openshift-cluster-monitoring-operator-release-4.15.yaml are sourced from the respective branches instead of
master
, wouldn't that automatically fix things for us?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
(since this commit won't go into
4.15
as it's out, and only4.16
will be up-to-date withmaster
?)There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
But with the code from
master
we fetch versions for4.14
and4.17
, so it should be compatible with both.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Right, I was confused by that. Could you elaborate a bit on the branching approach, since we already have branches till
4.17
on both (I'm not sure what exactly the "branching" entails here)? I'd also like to reiterate the idea of having a conditional that checks both/manifests/release/kustomization.yaml
and/manifests/components/release/kustomization.yaml
for a200
, and goes with that, which would fix things on both fronts. We can drop the older path once the CMO versions using them correspond to EOL releases. WDYT?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Sorry, I wasn't explicit, by branching I mean "conditional branching": adding a condition on the version (we're talking about the same thing :))