-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 576
OPRUN-4200: [OLMv1]: Promote NewOLMOwnSingleNamespace to GA #2527
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
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
|
Hello @camilamacedo86! Some important instructions when contributing to openshift/api: |
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.
Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
|
@camilamacedo86: This pull request references OPRUN-4200 which is a valid jira issue. Warning: The referenced jira issue has an invalid target version for the target branch this PR targets: expected the story to target the "4.21.0" version, but no target version was set. 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 openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository. |
|
@camilamacedo86 I took a look at the feature promotion verification and it looks like we are missing testing on metal-ipv6 (disconnected) and only have 3 tests. Is there a reason that this isn't being tested in disconnected environments and that we do not have the required minimum of 5 tests? |
|
Hi @everettraven, This feature is quite small, so it was a bit tricky to come up with 5 tests. With that, we should soon meet the 5 test criteria for compliance. Regarding disconnected environments — the current tests use content from the OCP catalog. |
f33c7b2 to
c7f2443
Compare
|
@camilamacedo86: This pull request references OPRUN-4200 which is a valid jira 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 openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository. |
|
/test verify-feature-promotion |
1 similar comment
|
/test verify-feature-promotion |
|
@camilamacedo86 There's at least one out of date generated file on this PR, please run |
|
/test verify-feature-promotion |
c7f2443 to
64e6d7e
Compare
64e6d7e to
df1ddc4
Compare
|
/test minor-e2e-upgrade-minor |
df1ddc4 to
035091d
Compare
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.
The generated manifests that are included here seem off. It looks like it regenerated manifests under a new openshift-api/ sub-directory that doesn't exist today.
Let's remove that please.
|
@camilamacedo86 Looking at Thanks! |
035091d to
9489bea
Compare
|
Thank you for checking out.
I cloned the project in a local dir called
Yes, I trigged more jobs but seems that today we have been facing many issues with ocp ci ecosystem. |
|
/retest-required |
|
@camilamacedo86 I'm still not sure I'm following why we need to add the The only files I'm expecting to be updated here are:
|
They were generated with the command Should we run or not this one? |
9489bea to
87a7229
Compare
87a7229 to
3a93502
Compare
|
@camilamacedo86 Thanks for bringing it to my attention that this is in a state ready for another review. This PR is in my queue to review today. |
|
/test verify-feature-promotion Just for you be able to check the latest state. |
|
Doing a manual analysis aggregating the results across rename, this is the latest state of verification (focusing on the renames that don't outright pass):
With this in mind, it looks like even if the rename is taken into account the |
|
Would it be possible for us to collect more runs for metal-ipv4 to get to a state where this would have passed the check without the rename? |
|
@camilamacedo86 I just noticed that this feature gate is pointing to a closed OpenShift Enhancement Proposal that never received any review from OpenShift API reviewers despite there being an API change involved. I'm assuming this is now related to openshift/enhancements#1849 which is currently under review. This will not be able to be promoted until the review has been completed and the enhancement has been merged as accepted. |
|
Thank you, @everettraven! 🙌 The fix for the flake (openshift/api#2527) has been merged and is now included in the image:
To move forward with promotion, we just need to gather more data to confirm that no test shows a success rate below 95% and get merged the PEP openshift/enhancements#1849. Once that’s both are in place, then we can move forward. c/c @perdasilva |
|
/retest-required |
|
@camilamacedo86: The following tests failed, say
Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard. 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-sigs/prow repository. I understand the commands that are listed here. |
No description provided.