-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 63
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
Deprecate v1alpha1 #524
Deprecate v1alpha1 #524
Conversation
370c7e7
to
aa1d0f9
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.
LGTM. Would like @davidfestal's review as well, as he's more familiar with the generator code.
@@ -81,7 +81,8 @@ | |||
}, | |||
"fieldsV1": { | |||
"description": "FieldsV1 holds the first JSON version format as described in the \"FieldsV1\" type.", | |||
"type": "Any" | |||
"type": "object", | |||
"additionalProperties": false |
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.
Is it expected to have an object
with no properties and additionalproperties to false
? That seems strange because if I'm not mistaken it just prevents putting anything in the corresponding field. Maybe this should be managed as a special case (maganedFields
is somehow a special case in itself...)?
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'll take a look.
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.
Good catch!
It was tricky but I found a workaround 20a4516
But I think additional work is needed out of the current PR scope since(the main branch state) we generate all metadata additionalProperties: false, like managedField https://github.com/devfile/api/blob/main/schemas/latest/dev-workspace-template.json#L100
But K8s Json Schema does not specify any and AFAIU it's supposed to be true by default https://kubernetesjsonschema.dev/v1.14.0/_definitions.json#/definitions/io.k8s.apimachinery.pkg.apis.meta.v1.ObjectMeta
20a4516
to
b47ab27
Compare
After discussion with @davidfestal I dropped adding metadata since seems I just misunderstood the referenced PR and it will lead to issues. |
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.
Great !
Do you think you could open an issue about ensuring, in the validate
generator, that all Attributes
fields have the expected 3 annotations defined (cf PR #535) ?
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: amisevsk, davidfestal, sleshchenko 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 |
Signed-off-by: David Festal <dfestal@redhat.com>
adf49af
to
e826dde
Compare
New changes are detected. LGTM label has been removed. |
e826dde
to
8429547
Compare
pushed with force where I just reorganize commits to have clear history |
What does this PR do?
The purpose of this PR is deprecating v1alpha1 but since the current controller-tools does not support it, it also upgrades it to v0.6.1 the latest where it's available kubernetes-sigs/controller-tools@2fc390d
What issues does this PR fix or reference?
It's part of devfile/devworkspace-operator#471, other part will be on DWO side
Is your PR tested? Consider putting some instruction how to test your changes
It's tested with installing DWO and making sure everything works as expected. More see the corresponding section in devfile/devworkspace-operator#478
Docs PR