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

[release-2.6] Fix the conditions history in compliancyDetails #393

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jan 11, 2023

Conversation

mprahl
Copy link
Contributor

@mprahl mprahl commented Jan 11, 2023

This is a backport of #392 but needed to do it manually due to a test case being slightly different in 2.6.

The status.compliancyDetails[].conditions array was always limited to just a single condition due to a bug. This sets the limit to 10 instead.

Relates:
https://issues.redhat.com/browse/ACM-2708

The status.compliancyDetails[].conditions array was always limited to
just a single condition due to a bug. This sets the limit to 10 instead.

Relates:
https://issues.redhat.com/browse/ACM-2708

Signed-off-by: mprahl <mprahl@users.noreply.github.com>
(cherry picked from commit 0234403)
@sonarcloud
Copy link

sonarcloud bot commented Jan 11, 2023

Kudos, SonarCloud Quality Gate passed!    Quality Gate passed

Bug A 0 Bugs
Vulnerability A 0 Vulnerabilities
Security Hotspot A 0 Security Hotspots
Code Smell A 0 Code Smells

100.0% 100.0% Coverage
0.0% 0.0% Duplication

) (conditionsRes []policyv1.Condition) {
defer recoverFlow()
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think this looks good! One final thought: @willkutler do you recall why this is here? It was put in 3 years ago, so definitely no worries if you're not sure! fbcef07#diff-abd7bd58ac8e6e13efca328b26418fd3abf28bb9eec7112c669bbfd161e4e950
I want to make sure we're not introducing a panic somewhere, but I also don't recall seeing the "ALERT!" message in any logs...

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I don't unfortunately - some of the code was ported from the old policy controller so Yu might have written that. I haven't seen the ALERT message in any logs either so I think it's fine to remove

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Okay! Let's do this!!!

@openshift-ci
Copy link

openshift-ci bot commented Jan 11, 2023

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: dhaiducek, mprahl

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

@openshift-merge-robot openshift-merge-robot merged commit 7f7054e into stolostron:release-2.6 Jan 11, 2023
@mprahl
Copy link
Contributor Author

mprahl commented Jan 25, 2023

/revert does this work?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants