KEP-4358: Custom resource field selectors GA

[jpbetz]

KEP: https://github.com/kubernetes/enhancements/blob/master/keps/sig-api-machinery/95-custom-resource-definitions/README.md
kubernetes/enhancements#4358

[netlify]

✅ Pull request preview available for checking

Built without sensitive environment variables

Name	Link
🔨 Latest commit	2b996e4
🔍 Latest deploy log	https://app.netlify.com/sites/kubernetes-io-main-staging/deploys/6723a565b9bacd00084b6479
😎 Deploy Preview	https://deploy-preview-48089--kubernetes-io-main-staging.netlify.app
📱 Preview on mobile	Toggle QR Code... Use your smartphone camera to open QR code link.

---

To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify site configuration.

[sftim]

Thanks. I think we should also revise https://kubernetes.io/docs/concepts/extend-kubernetes/api-extension/custom-resources/ because the feature gate is now locked to true (well, it will be for v1.32)

/hold
pending confirmation that the code change has gone in to k/k

[netlify]

👷 Deploy Preview for kubernetes-io-vnext-staging processing.

Name	Link
🔨 Latest commit	2b996e4
🔍 Latest deploy log	https://app.netlify.com/sites/kubernetes-io-vnext-staging/deploys/6723a5655777ca00082e9aea

[jpbetz]

Thanks. I think we should also revise https://kubernetes.io/docs/concepts/extend-kubernetes/api-extension/custom-resources/ because the feature gate is now locked to true (well, it will be for v1.32)

Updated.

[tengqm]

I did a quick search but I failed to find the upstream source code change related to this promotion.

[jpbetz]

I did a quick search but I failed to find the upstream source code change related to this promotion.

Thanks! I just opened kubernetes/kubernetes#127673 but it might take time to merge because it's backed up on some feature gate stuff.

/hold
Until kubernetes/kubernetes#127673 merges

[jpbetz]

/hold cancel
kubernetes/kubernetes#127673 has merged

[jpbetz]

Friendly nudge that this is ready to merge

[jpbetz]

Friendly nudge on this

[tengqm]

/approve

[k8s-ci-robot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: tengqm

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:

• content/en/docs/OWNERS [tengqm]

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

[dipesh-rawat]

@jpbetz We might also want to make some revisions to the content in the ‘Custom Resources’ concept page under the "Selectable fields for custom resources" section.

• Reference link - https://k8s.io/docs/concepts/extend-kubernetes/api-extension/custom-resources/#crd-selectable-fields

• Markdown file - /docs/concepts/extend-kubernetes/api-extension/custom-resources.md

[jpbetz]

Joe Betz We might also want to make some revisions to the content in the ‘Custom Resources’ concept page under the "Selectable fields for custom resources" section.

• Reference link - https://k8s.io/docs/concepts/extend-kubernetes/api-extension/custom-resources/#crd-selectable-fields
• Markdown file - /docs/concepts/extend-kubernetes/api-extension/custom-resources.md

Thanks! I added this section in Beta and nothing has changed since promoting to GA. Do you see anything specific that needs my attention?

[sftim]

Check the wording of https://deploy-preview-48089--kubernetes-io-main-staging.netlify.app/docs/concepts/extend-kubernetes/api-extension/custom-resources/#crd-selectable-fields

We should drop the mention about whether you have enabled the feature gate; once we lock them to enabled, the point is settled.

But also, we should try to incorporate some of this text in the general page. It's no longer a feature that you can opt of of; it's just part of the CRD API.

---

Also, please update https://kubernetes.io/docs/concepts/overview/working-with-objects/field-selectors/ to link to the relevant part of the CRD docs.

[jpbetz]

@sftim Feedback applied.

[sftim]

LGTM for docs. Does this need a tech review?

[sftim]

@jpbetz please link to the KEP from the PR description. Or if there is no KEP, to the promotion PR in k/k.

[jpbetz]

LGTM for docs. Does this need a tech review?

I don't think so. All the substance of this documentation was tech reviewed for Beta. I can't imagine what value I'd be asking a tech reviewer to add for these edits.

[jpbetz]

Feedback applied

[sftim]

This is for kubernetes/enhancements#4358

/lgtm

[k8s-ci-robot]

LGTM label has been added.

Git tree hash: c65115680071abd0028abe1b7036b785b9b3abf9

[sftim]

/remove-label tide/merge-method-squash

3 commits is fine (30 wouldn't be!)