(chore): bump k8s to 1.24

[everettraven]

Description of the change:
Made changes to bump k8s dependencies to support k8s 1.24.

Changes:

• bump dependencies in go.mod to support k8s 1.24
• changes in vendor directory from running go mod vendor
• update testdata CRDs spec to have the preserveUnknownFields: false value.
  • There were some additional errors that were occurring during the unit tests related to the preserveUnknownFields field being automatically set to true. I believe this has to do with the v1beta1 CRDs being converted to v1 since v1beta1 is no longer supported for CRDs (more info: https://kubernetes.io/docs/tasks/extend-kubernetes/custom-resources/custom-resource-definitions/#field-pruning). If this should not be done I am happy to try and find a different solution, but this seemed to resolve the issues.
• modifications to test cases in validate_test.go and bundle_test.go
  • There was some test failures happening that expected a warning like CRD etcdclusters.etcd.database.coreos.com/v1beta2 is present in bundle "etcdoperator.v0.9.4" but not defined in CSV to show up as an error. I found that the following shows that it should be a warning and not an error:

    operator-registry/pkg/lib/validation/bundle.go

    Lines 63 to 66 in 1436816

    	// CRDs not defined in the CSV present in the bundle
    	for key := range keySet {
    	result.Add(errors.WarnInvalidBundle(fmt.Sprintf("CRD %s is present in bundle %q but not defined in CSV", keyToString(key), bundle.Name), key))
    	}

    If this is not the case and it should be showing up as an error, I am happy to try and investigate this a bit further but would likely need some direction as to where that warning should be converted to an error instead of a warning.

Motivation for the change:
Begin supporting k8s 1.24

Reviewer Checklist

• Implementation matches the proposed design, or proposal is updated to match implementation
• Sufficient unit test coverage
• Sufficient end-to-end test coverage
• Docs updated or added to /docs
• Commit messages sensible and descriptive

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #964 (3ab0a59) into master (cefb2f6) will decrease coverage by 0.01%.
The diff coverage is n/a.

❗ Current head 3ab0a59 differs from pull request most recent head 02ee178. Consider uploading reports for the commit 02ee178 to get more accurate results

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master     #964      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   52.48%   52.47%   -0.02%     
==========================================
  Files         103      103              
  Lines        9240     9240              
==========================================
- Hits         4850     4849       -1     
- Misses       3468     3469       +1     
  Partials      922      922              

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
pkg/registry/query.go	60.41% <0.00%> (-0.53%)	⬇️

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update cefb2f6...02ee178. Read the comment docs.

[joelanford]

How hard would it be to bump the CRD versions from v1beta1 to v1? v1beta1 CRDs are no longer supported (since k8s 1.22), so it seems like those should be bumped at some point.

It seems like this could be done in a follow-up since the tests seem to have all passed.

[everettraven]

How hard would it be to bump the CRD versions from v1beta1 to v1? v1beta1 CRDs are no longer supported (since k8s 1.22), so it seems like those should be bumped at some point.

It seems like this could be done in a follow-up since the tests seem to have all passed.

@joelanford I don't think it should be to difficult to do that, but can't say for sure. I agree that this would be a good follow up item. May even be able to get away with an update from v1beta1 --> v1alpha1 if it seems like that would be better than a v1beta1 --> v1 upgrade

[dinhxuanvu]

/approve

[openshift-ci]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: dinhxuanvu, everettraven

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:

• OWNERS [dinhxuanvu]

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

[dinhxuanvu]

@everettraven Would you mind rebasing this PR?

[everettraven]

Would you mind rebasing this PR?

@dinhxuanvu just gave it a shot (still learning how to rebase). Let me know if it needs anything else.

Also noticed the e2e test failed while trying to install podman.

the go-apidiff is also an expected failure due to some changes in the ObjectMeta api in k8s 1.24

[dinhxuanvu]

Would you mind rebasing this PR?

@dinhxuanvu just gave it a shot (still learning how to rebase). Let me know if it needs anything else.

Also noticed the e2e test failed while trying to install podman.

the go-apidiff is also an expected failure due to some changes in the ObjectMeta api in k8s 1.24

I'm trying to look into this podman installation problem. go-apidiff is expected to fail here so no worries about that.

[dinhxuanvu]

The podman installation issue seems to be a known issue that is pending: containers/podman#14278 (comment)
We may need to wait for a bit to see if things are sorted out. Stay tuned.

[lsm5]

3.4.2-5 has just been built and should now be available. Please give it a try. Thanks.

[everettraven]

@dinhxuanvu is there anything else that needs to be done to get this merged?

[dinhxuanvu]

/lgtm