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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

feat: add new validator to check/warning when the resource request is not defined for a container used/shipped in the bundle #197

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Dec 9, 2021
Merged

feat: add new validator to check/warning when the resource request is not defined for a container used/shipped in the bundle #197

merged 1 commit into from
Dec 9, 2021

Conversation

camilamacedo86
Copy link
Contributor

@camilamacedo86 camilamacedo86 commented Nov 28, 2021 •
edited
Loading

Description
Add a new validator that will check the resources of the containers shipped on the bundle

Motivation
Closes: #172

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. and removed do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. labels Nov 30, 2021
perdasilva
perdasilva reviewed Dec 6, 2021
View reviewed changes
pkg/validation/internal/good_practices_test.go
errStrings []string
warnStrings []string
}{
{
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Is it th exercising the other error paths as well, e.g. when the bundle is nil, or the bundle.CSV is nil, etc.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

also when csv.Spec.InstallStrategy.StrategySpec.DeploymentSpecs is nil

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Ideally yes, I agree.
Good point done. 🥇
thank you

@kevinrizza
Copy link
Member

/approve

This looks reasonable to me. Per's comments seem relevant, but other than that I'm fine with merging this.

@openshift-ci
Copy link

openshift-ci bot commented Dec 6, 2021

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: camilamacedo86, kevinrizza

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

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

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

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Dec 6, 2021
@perdasilva
Copy link
Contributor

/lgtm

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Dec 9, 2021
@openshift-merge-robot openshift-merge-robot merged commit af1f4d2 into operator-framework:master Dec 9, 2021
@camilamacedo86 camilamacedo86 mentioned this pull request Dec 10, 2021
Merged
2 tasks
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@perdasilva perdasilva perdasilva left review comments

@gallettilance gallettilance Awaiting requested review from gallettilance

@njhale njhale Awaiting requested review from njhale

Assignees

@perdasilva perdasilva

Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Add common linter check to ensure that all operator/managers defined the resource request
4 participants
@camilamacedo86 @kevinrizza @perdasilva @openshift-merge-robot