Skip to content
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

Introduce context.Context into some of our "Context" objects #14778

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Dec 13, 2022

Conversation

justinsb
Copy link
Member

The rule of thumb is that we shouldn't be embedding a context.Context,
but it is reasonable when the lifetime is similar and when the
refactor would otherwise be unacceptably large.

This is a minimal way to introduce it, based on adding the support
needed in the GCS support for serviceAccountIssuerDiscovery. We will
need to plumb through the context in many more places over time.

The rule of thumb is that we shouldn't be embedding a context.Context,
but it is reasonable when the lifetime is similar and when the
refactor would otherwise be unacceptably large.

This is a minimal way to introduce it, based on adding the support
needed in the GCS support for serviceAccountIssuerDiscovery.  We will
need to plumb through the context in many more places over time.
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files. labels Dec 12, 2022
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added area/nodeup area/provider/aws Issues or PRs related to aws provider area/provider/gcp Issues or PRs related to gcp provider labels Dec 12, 2022
@@ -38,6 +39,8 @@ var testRunTasksOptions = fi.RunTasksOptions{
}

func TestElasticIPCreate(t *testing.T) {
ctx := context.TODO()
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Where we actually have no way of using an existing context that could be propagated, I think we should use context.Background(). And keep using TODO() where we really should attempt to propagate an existing one.

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Dec 13, 2022
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: olemarkus

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:

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

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Dec 13, 2022
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot merged commit 091754f into kubernetes:master Dec 13, 2022
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added this to the v1.26 milestone Dec 13, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. area/nodeup area/provider/aws Issues or PRs related to aws provider area/provider/gcp Issues or PRs related to gcp provider cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants