🐛 ROSA: Fix version gate Ack for rosa hcp y-stream version upgrade

[serngawy]

What type of PR is this?
Bug

What this PR does / why we need it:
This PR approve the gate version acknowledgment for ROSA-HCP y-stream upgrade

Which issue(s) this PR fixes (optional, in fixes #<issue number>(, fixes #<issue_number>, ...) format, will close the issue(s) when PR gets merged):
Fixes #

Special notes for your reviewer:

Checklist:

• squashed commits
• includes documentation
• includes emojis
• adds unit tests
• adds or updates e2e tests

Release note:

Add versionGate Acknowledgement for upgrading ROSA-HCP y-stream versions

[k8s-ci-robot]

Hi @serngawy. 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-sigs/prow repository.

[serngawy]

/cc @muraee @damdo please approve for test

[damdo]

/ok-to-test

[serngawy]

/hold

[serngawy]

/unhold

[damdo]

/lgtm
/assign @richardcase @muraee

/hold

Until e2e jobs on CI are fixed.

[damdo]

@serngawy could you please add a Release Note in the description of the PR for this one? Thanks!

[jnpacker]

Can you confirm that we are introducing the user flow that we will always require an Acknowledgement, (unless AlwaysAcknowledge) is set, for all Y-Stream upgrades (that's what the code flow looks like to me. This is being done even though OCP may NOT require it. OCP 4.16 to 4.17 does not require an acknowledge.

@serngawy can you confirm this is also ROSA-HCP's use case, or are they aware of when to require the acknowledgement?

[jnpacker]

Fix message, and question on whether this flow is now forced for all Y stream upgrades.

[serngawy]

Can you confirm that we are introducing the user flow that we will always require an Acknowledgement, (unless AlwaysAcknowledge) is set, for all Y-Stream upgrades (that's what the code flow looks like to me. This is being done even though OCP may NOT require it. OCP 4.16 to 4.17 does not require an acknowledge.

@serngawy can you confirm this is also ROSA-HCP's use case, or are they aware of when to require the acknowledgement?

The code check first if there is an versionGate Acknowledge is required, if upgrading y-stream doesn't require Acknowledge the upgrade will proceed similar to z-stream upgrade.

The workflow is;
1- User set the version to upgrade (assuming the user not aware that acknowledgement is required)
2- The ROSA-HCP will return back with error message that an acknowledgement is required to proceed with upgrade.
3- The user set the versionGate to acknowledge
4- The upgrade will proceed
5- once the upgrade done the version gate will set back to waitForAcknowledge.

[jnpacker]

Got an explanation and a look at the code as to why ACK doesn't apply when not required.

[andreadecorte]

lgtm

[damdo]

/lgtm

[damdo]

@nrb @richardcase any of you able to do an approver type review? TY

[nrb]

/approve

[k8s-ci-robot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: nrb

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:

• config/crd/bases/OWNERS [nrb]
• controlplane/rosa/OWNERS [nrb]
• pkg/rosa/OWNERS [nrb]

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

[nrb]

CI's fixed.

/unhold

[nrb]

/test pull-cluster-api-provider-aws-test

Failed due to CI account limits, not this code.