📖 update webhooks for core types to match controller-runtime v0.15 #3399

mythi · 2023-05-09T09:56:19Z

k8s-ci-robot · 2023-05-09T09:56:27Z

Hi @mythi. Thanks for your PR.

I'm waiting for a kubernetes-sigs member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with /ok-to-test on its own line. Until that is done, I will not automatically test new commits in this PR, but the usual testing commands by org members will still work. Regular contributors should join the org to skip this step.

Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the ok-to-test label.

I understand the commands that are listed here.

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/test-infra repository.

camilamacedo86

@mythi,

I am not sure if I understand this changes.
See that the Handler still existing for 0.15.0: https://pkg.go.dev/sigs.k8s.io/controller-runtime/pkg/webhook/admission#Handler

The only breaking change that I saw is that now we have admission.Warnings in the method signature, see:

https://github.com/kubernetes-sigs/kubebuilder/pull/3444/files#diff-c157b03fcfe4b2116022e44c782e84f45db09e5e1488e2061c9007e37e634c48R119-R124

This change should be in placed in the docs as well for master since after we do the changes we must to run make generate and then the docs are updated.

So, do we still needing this PR?

mythi · 2023-06-14T06:09:37Z

@camilamacedo86 I believe it's still needed. pkg/inject is also removed so the example makes the webhook to crash. This moves the book to use the builder approach following the CR change and my fixes

Signed-off-by: Mikko Ylinen <mikko.ylinen@intel.com>

mythi · 2023-06-20T04:59:03Z

@camilamacedo86 anything I can/need to do here?

camilamacedo86 · 2023-06-20T12:28:12Z

Hi @mythi,

@camilamacedo86 anything I can/need to do here?

By using the master branch and checking the samples code in the master, what issues are you still face?
Can you list them out and let us know what changes are required then, I can help you with where then should be made.

I believe it's still needed. pkg/inject is also removed so the example makes the webhook to crash.

We do not use sigs.k8s.io/controller-runtime/pkg/runtime/inject.
However, if we need to change something it seems that it must be done in. the default scaffolds.
So, can you let us know when you create a project, then api and a webhook what is wrong?

mythi · 2023-06-21T04:10:53Z

So, can you let us know when you create a project, then api and a webhook what is wrong?

@camilamacedo86 hmm but this PR is not about the scaffolding process but this page https://book.kubebuilder.io/reference/webhook-for-core-types.html which is wrong.

camilamacedo86 · 2023-06-23T16:30:18Z

Hi @mythi,

@camilamacedo86 hmm but this PR is not about the scaffolding process but this page https://book.kubebuilder.io/reference/webhook-for-core-types.html which is wrong.

It seems make sense. When it no longer be a draft could you please either ping in the slack so that we won a help from the community in the review?

camilamacedo86 · 2023-06-23T16:30:50Z

@erikgb

I think you are very skilled in this area, could you please give a hand in the review of this PR?

erikgb

Thanks @mythi! This looks good! A couple of suggestions/nits, but none of them should block this PR from being merged.

docs/book/src/reference/webhook-for-core-types.md

erikgb · 2023-06-24T07:54:27Z

docs/book/src/reference/webhook-for-core-types.md


 ## Update main.go

 Now you need to register your handler in the webhook server.

 ```go
-mgr.GetWebhookServer().Register("/mutate-v1-pod", &webhook.Admission{Handler: &podAnnotator{Client: mgr.GetClient()}})
+    if err := builder.WebhookManagedBy(mgr).


Maybe we should add a func to podAnnotator to set it up with Manager - as we do for controllers?

func (r *podAnnotator) SetupWithManager(mgr ctrl.Manager) error

IMO the code will be easier to read. An advanced user can always in-line it...

AFAIU, the same is covered by the new snippet. That is used with:

mgr, err := ctrl.NewManager(ctrl.GetConfigOrDie(), ctrl.Options{}) ... if err := builder.WebhookManagedBy(mgr). ...

Ok, but if using kubebuilder to create the webhook, I think it will generate a SetupWithManager func.

Ok, but if using kubebuilder to create the webhook, I think it will generate a SetupWithManager func.

@erikgb is correct. For example, see: https://github.com/kubernetes-sigs/kubebuilder/blob/master/testdata/project-v4/api/v1/captain_webhook.go

Even though they do the same thing, I agree that for the Kubebuilder documentation we should ensure we are accurately reflecting what is scaffolded by default by Kubebuilder.

ack, will look into it

this should be covered now. apologies for the silence!

k8s-ci-robot · 2023-07-15T18:59:05Z

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: mythi
Once this PR has been reviewed and has the lgtm label, please assign varshaprasad96 for approval. For more information see the Kubernetes Code Review Process.

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

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

OWNERS

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

mythi · 2023-08-16T07:16:36Z

@erikgb @camilamacedo86 the review comments are addressed, and this is ready for another review

erikgb · 2023-08-17T08:11:01Z

/ok-to-test
/lgtm

k8s-triage-robot · 2024-01-21T14:20:57Z

The Kubernetes project currently lacks enough contributors to adequately respond to all PRs.

This bot triages PRs according to the following rules:

After 90d of inactivity, lifecycle/stale is applied
After 30d of inactivity since lifecycle/stale was applied, lifecycle/rotten is applied
After 30d of inactivity since lifecycle/rotten was applied, the PR is closed

You can:

Mark this PR as fresh with /remove-lifecycle stale
Close this PR with /close
Offer to help out with Issue Triage

Please send feedback to sig-contributor-experience at kubernetes/community.

/lifecycle stale

k8s-triage-robot · 2024-03-02T13:02:19Z

The Kubernetes project currently lacks enough active contributors to adequately respond to all PRs.

This bot triages PRs according to the following rules:

After 90d of inactivity, lifecycle/stale is applied
After 30d of inactivity since lifecycle/stale was applied, lifecycle/rotten is applied
After 30d of inactivity since lifecycle/rotten was applied, the PR is closed

You can:

Mark this PR as fresh with /remove-lifecycle rotten
Close this PR with /close
Offer to help out with Issue Triage

Please send feedback to sig-contributor-experience at kubernetes/community.

/lifecycle rotten

k8s-ci-robot · 2024-03-04T11:03:46Z

New changes are detected. LGTM label has been removed.

mythi · 2024-03-04T11:04:28Z

/remove-lifecycle rotten

docs/book/src/reference/webhook-for-core-types.md

camilamacedo86 · 2024-04-07T14:20:32Z

docs/book/src/reference/webhook-for-core-types.md

-		return admission.Errored(http.StatusInternalServerError, err)
-	}
-	return admission.PatchResponseFromRaw(req.Object.Raw, marshaledPod)
+	return nil


before it could return an error because it was patching the value
so, if an error were faced it will be returned now I am not sure if we we are patching the value.
Did you tested it out?

It seems that it is not doing the same.

Did you tested it out?

The code is same as in https://github.com/kubernetes-sigs/controller-runtime/blob/76d3d0826fa9dca267c70c68c706f6de40084043/examples/builtins/mutatingwebhook.go so I'm assuming it's tested by controller-runtime. FWIW, my own webhook follows the same flow also.

It is not the same
Before it was use the client to perform the changes on the cluster side and return its result (nil OR error)
Now, it adds the value to the pod, do nothing and return nil always

Also, we are changing how to do.
So, anyway, for any tutorial example we should test things out, ensure that it is right.
Could you please test this one?

It is not the same

I'm pretty sure it's the same. I just copied the Default() func and compared with what is in this file and there are no functional changes.

But the example that we have here does

marshaledPod, err := json.Marshal(pod) if err != nil { return admission.Errored(http.StatusInternalServerError, err) } return admission.PatchResponseFromRaw(req.Object.Raw, marshaledPod)

It would not add too much value just have the sample controller-runtime right?
Would still possible to do the same with the new changes?

It would not add too much value just have the sample controller-runtime right?

That's how it's been. I'm just a messenger and making the same changes that controller-runtime has between controller-runtime release-0.14 and release-0.15.

Hi @mythi

Sure, and we appreciate it a lot.
What I am trying to say is that we should update the doc to keep the same example that we have before but now addressing the controller-runtime changes. That would provide more value than change the current example to copy and paste an example from there.

So that we could ensure that we are able to do the same but in another way and that the example that we have is valid.

That would provide more value than change the current example to copy and paste an example from there.

What I tried to say was that the current example is also a copy and paste and that the diff here is how controller-runtime addressed their changes in the example. I kinda understand what you're asking me to change but the counterargument is why would we want to diverge from the example given elsewhere (especially since we used to be aligned).

Signed-off-by: Mikko Ylinen <mikko.ylinen@intel.com>

drewwells · 2024-04-19T19:46:24Z

Would love to see docs updated. The example code works nicely, but the docs are misleading (to me). They don't align with the code example.

mythi · 2024-04-20T05:56:31Z

The example code works nicely, but the docs are misleading (to me). They don't align with the code example.

Just to clarify: when you say "example", you mean the controller-runtime example the book points to? This PR is exactly about getting those aligned.

camilamacedo86 · 2024-04-20T06:01:46Z

HI @mythi

How, we should change this doc?

Just ensure that the current example provided in the docs (same kubebuilder example) will be changed to address breakchanges
Ensure that the example provide can properly work and matches with kubebuilder layout by creating a project and checking it out

We should not:

Copy and paste the examples from controller-runtime (it does not bring value for the users, if we want to use their example we can just link it. Make no sense we duplicate things) Furthermore, just copy a controller-runtime in the doc does not mean that will work. We must to describe to users how to do the same with Kubebuilder layout, describe the steps, and ensure that the info provided is accurate.
Change the example in away that it does not work with the default kubebuilder layout or not fits well on it.
Change the logic of the example provided without any good reason to do so.

I hope that clarifies.

mythi · 2024-04-22T05:05:37Z

We should not:

I don't think the current example meets any of these bullets either. However, if that is desired, we could close this and someone can pick up re-writing this page according to the new ask.

k8s-ci-robot · 2024-05-16T13:06:31Z

@mythi: The following tests failed, say /retest to rerun all failed tests or /retest-required to rerun all mandatory failed tests:

Test name	Commit	Details	Required	Rerun command
pull-kubebuilder-e2e-k8s-1-27-10	`7bbc5f5`	link	true	`/test pull-kubebuilder-e2e-k8s-1-27-10`
pull-kubebuilder-e2e-k8s-1-28-6	`7bbc5f5`	link	true	`/test pull-kubebuilder-e2e-k8s-1-28-6`
pull-kubebuilder-e2e-k8s-1-29-0	`7bbc5f5`	link	true	`/test pull-kubebuilder-e2e-k8s-1-29-0`
pull-kubebuilder-e2e-k8s-1-28-0	`3781a81`	link	true	`/test pull-kubebuilder-e2e-k8s-1-28-0`
pull-kubebuilder-e2e-k8s-1-30-0	`2db6ee6`	link	true	`/test pull-kubebuilder-e2e-k8s-1-30-0`

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard. Please help us cut down on flakes by linking to an open issue when you hit one in your PR.

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.

camilamacedo86 · 2024-08-22T06:28:55Z

Hi @mythi

See: #4061
I tried to address those changes.

mythi · 2024-08-22T07:19:40Z

Hi @mythi

See: #4061 I tried to address those changes.

Yeah I saw that. I think it has problems with the markers and perhaps mention when to use one over the other. Other than that looks fine

camilamacedo86 · 2024-08-22T07:52:29Z

HI @mythi

Yeah I saw that. I think it has problems with the markers and perhaps mention when to use one over the other. Other than that looks fine

Not sure if I can follow up.
But please, feel free to review the PR and add your inputs there.
Your collab is very welcome

k8s-ci-robot added do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. labels May 9, 2023

k8s-ci-robot requested review from everettraven and Kavinjsir May 9, 2023 09:56

k8s-ci-robot added needs-ok-to-test Indicates a PR that requires an org member to verify it is safe to test. size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files. labels May 9, 2023

mythi force-pushed the cr-0.15 branch from f25dbe3 to 630a689 Compare May 10, 2023 06:23

camilamacedo86 reviewed Jun 14, 2023

View reviewed changes

mythi referenced this pull request in kubernetes-sigs/controller-runtime Jun 14, 2023

🌱 update builtin webhook paths

696c28c

Signed-off-by: Mikko Ylinen <mikko.ylinen@intel.com>

erikgb reviewed Jun 24, 2023

View reviewed changes

mythi force-pushed the cr-0.15 branch from 630a689 to 09e5373 Compare July 15, 2023 18:58

mythi marked this pull request as ready for review July 15, 2023 18:59

k8s-ci-robot removed the do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. label Jul 15, 2023

k8s-ci-robot requested a review from varshaprasad96 July 15, 2023 18:59

mythi changed the title ~~📖 update webhooks for core types to match cr 0.15~~ 📖 update webhooks for core types to match controller-runtime v0.15 Jul 15, 2023

mythi force-pushed the cr-0.15 branch from 09e5373 to 7bbc5f5 Compare August 17, 2023 07:47

k8s-ci-robot added ok-to-test Indicates a non-member PR verified by an org member that is safe to test. and removed needs-ok-to-test Indicates a PR that requires an org member to verify it is safe to test. labels Aug 17, 2023

k8s-ci-robot assigned erikgb Aug 17, 2023

k8s-ci-robot added the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Aug 17, 2023

k8s-ci-robot added the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Sep 13, 2023

k8s-ci-robot added the lifecycle/stale Denotes an issue or PR has remained open with no activity and has become stale. label Jan 21, 2024

k8s-ci-robot added lifecycle/rotten Denotes an issue or PR that has aged beyond stale and will be auto-closed. and removed lifecycle/stale Denotes an issue or PR has remained open with no activity and has become stale. labels Mar 2, 2024

mythi force-pushed the cr-0.15 branch from 7bbc5f5 to 0b86027 Compare March 4, 2024 11:03

k8s-ci-robot removed the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Mar 4, 2024

k8s-ci-robot removed the lifecycle/rotten Denotes an issue or PR that has aged beyond stale and will be auto-closed. label Mar 4, 2024

mythi force-pushed the cr-0.15 branch 2 times, most recently from f66aa72 to 3781a81 Compare March 4, 2024 11:59

k8s-ci-robot removed the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Mar 22, 2024

camilamacedo86 reviewed Apr 6, 2024

View reviewed changes

docs/book/src/reference/webhook-for-core-types.md Show resolved Hide resolved

camilamacedo86 reviewed Apr 7, 2024

View reviewed changes

docs/book/src/reference/webhook-for-core-types.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

camilamacedo86 reviewed Apr 7, 2024

View reviewed changes

📖 update webhooks for core types to match controller-runtime v0.15

2db6ee6

Signed-off-by: Mikko Ylinen <mikko.ylinen@intel.com>

mythi force-pushed the cr-0.15 branch from 3781a81 to 2db6ee6 Compare April 8, 2024 11:22

camilamacedo86 added the help wanted Denotes an issue that needs help from a contributor. Must meet "help wanted" guidelines. label May 24, 2024

camilamacedo86 mentioned this pull request Aug 9, 2024

📖 update and supplement webhook documentation with example to work with core types #4061

Merged

mythi closed this Aug 21, 2024

📖 update webhooks for core types to match controller-runtime v0.15 #3399

📖 update webhooks for core types to match controller-runtime v0.15 #3399

Conversation

mythi commented May 9, 2023

k8s-ci-robot commented May 9, 2023

camilamacedo86 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

mythi commented Jun 14, 2023

mythi commented Jun 20, 2023

camilamacedo86 commented Jun 20, 2023 • edited Loading

mythi commented Jun 21, 2023

camilamacedo86 commented Jun 23, 2023

camilamacedo86 commented Jun 23, 2023

erikgb left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

k8s-ci-robot commented Jul 15, 2023

mythi commented Aug 16, 2023

erikgb commented Aug 17, 2023

k8s-triage-robot commented Jan 21, 2024

k8s-triage-robot commented Mar 2, 2024

k8s-ci-robot commented Mar 4, 2024

mythi commented Mar 4, 2024

camilamacedo86 Apr 7, 2024 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

camilamacedo86 Apr 8, 2024 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

camilamacedo86 Apr 8, 2024 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

camilamacedo86 Apr 8, 2024 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

drewwells commented Apr 19, 2024 • edited Loading

mythi commented Apr 20, 2024

camilamacedo86 commented Apr 20, 2024 • edited Loading

mythi commented Apr 22, 2024

k8s-ci-robot commented May 16, 2024

camilamacedo86 commented Aug 22, 2024

mythi commented Aug 22, 2024

camilamacedo86 commented Aug 22, 2024

camilamacedo86 commented Jun 20, 2023 •

edited

Loading

camilamacedo86 Apr 7, 2024 •

edited

Loading

camilamacedo86 Apr 8, 2024 •

edited

Loading

camilamacedo86 Apr 8, 2024 •

edited

Loading

camilamacedo86 Apr 8, 2024 •

edited

Loading

drewwells commented Apr 19, 2024 •

edited

Loading

camilamacedo86 commented Apr 20, 2024 •

edited

Loading