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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

🌱 bump capi to v0.3.10 #954

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Oct 1, 2020
Merged

🌱 bump capi to v0.3.10 #954

merged 1 commit into from
Oct 1, 2020

Conversation

nader-ziada
Copy link
Contributor

@nader-ziada nader-ziada commented Sep 22, 2020 •
edited
Loading

What this PR does / why we need it:

  • update cluster-api dependency to v0.3.10

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:
we might not want to merge this PR, but just to test out the new capi release and find any issues early

Please confirm that if this PR changes any image versions, then that's the sole change this PR makes.

TODOs:

  • squashed commits
  • includes documentation
  • adds unit tests

Release note:

Bump cluster-api version to  v0.3.10

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added release-note Denotes a PR that will be considered when it comes time to generate release notes. cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. labels Sep 22, 2020
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added area/provider/azure Issues or PRs related to azure provider sig/cluster-lifecycle Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Cluster Lifecycle. size/S Denotes a PR that changes 10-29 lines, ignoring generated files. labels Sep 22, 2020
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files. and removed size/S Denotes a PR that changes 10-29 lines, ignoring generated files. labels Sep 22, 2020
@nader-ziada
Copy link
Contributor Author

/test pull-cluster-api-provider-azure-capi-e2e

@nader-ziada
Copy link
Contributor Author

This PR in cluster-api kubernetes-sigs/cluster-api#3651 changed how the tests get their templates, so we would have to do the same here if we use the tests as-is :(

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files. and removed size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files. labels Sep 23, 2020
@nader-ziada
Copy link
Contributor Author

/test pull-cluster-api-provider-azure-capi-e2e

@CecileRobertMichon
Copy link
Contributor

@nader-ziada what exactly changed in kubernetes-sigs/cluster-api#3651 that requires changes here? If it's a breaking change it needs to be called out in the 0.3.10 release notes

@nader-ziada
Copy link
Contributor Author

@nader-ziada what exactly changed in kubernetes-sigs/cluster-api#3651 that requires changes here? If it's a breaking change it needs to be called out in the 0.3.10 release notes

its in the capi tests themselves, the tests are looking for a template with a specific file name and some changes in the template itself

@CecileRobertMichon
Copy link
Contributor

FYI @fabriziopandini

I think CAPZ is the only provider besides Docker than runs the CAPI E2E tests but might be worth calling out in release notes anyways.

@nader-ziada
Copy link
Contributor Author

@CecileRobertMichon all I had to do to fix the capi tests is update the templates:

  • for kcp-adoption use different labels; kcp-adoption.step1 instead of initial and kcp-adoption.step2 instead of kcp
  • for mhc test; use a flavor of mhc by adding the same cluster-template file we already use but call it cluster-template-mhc.yaml

@fabriziopandini
Copy link
Member

@CecileRobertMichon gotcha!
sorry for causing troubles

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Sep 26, 2020
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot removed the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Sep 27, 2020
@nader-ziada
Copy link
Contributor Author

rebased to include the ipv6 PR, and run the capi tests with it

/test pull-cluster-api-provider-azure-capi-e2e

@nader-ziada
Copy link
Contributor Author

/test pull-cluster-api-provider-azure-capi-e2e

@CecileRobertMichon
Copy link
Contributor

The adoption test seems broken in the master branch even with capi 0.3.9 https://testgrid.k8s.io/sig-cluster-lifecycle-cluster-api-provider-azure#periodic-capi-e2e

@CecileRobertMichon
Copy link
Contributor

it looks like it started failing with 5f7473f

@CecileRobertMichon
Copy link
Contributor

#965 should fix it

@nader-ziada
Copy link
Contributor Author

actually rc.1 just came out so switched to that

/test pull-cluster-api-provider-azure-capi-e2e

@nader-ziada
Copy link
Contributor Author

/retest

@nader-ziada
Copy link
Contributor Author

/test pull-cluster-api-provider-azure-capi-e2e

@nader-ziada
Copy link
Contributor Author

/test pull-cluster-api-provider-azure-capi-e2e

@nader-ziada
Copy link
Contributor Author

/test pull-cluster-api-provider-azure-capi-e2e

@nader-ziada
Copy link
Contributor Author

will try again to see if it was just a timeout issue

/test pull-cluster-api-provider-azure-capi-e2e

@nader-ziada
Copy link
Contributor Author

increased the timeout used by the capi test to see if that's the issue

/test pull-cluster-api-provider-azure-capi-e2e

@nader-ziada
Copy link
Contributor Author

the capi tests passed after increasing the timeout for the upgrade tests

now of the azure tests failed, but these already passed before so will try one more time while investigating

/test pull-cluster-api-provider-azure-e2e

@nader-ziada
Copy link
Contributor Author

/test pull-cluster-api-provider-azure-e2e

@vincepri
Copy link
Member

vincepri commented Oct 1, 2020

@nader-ziada Can we use the newly v0.3.10 tag for these now?:)

@nader-ziada nader-ziada changed the title 🌱 bump capi to v0.3.10-rc.0 🌱 bump capi to v0.3.10 Oct 1, 2020
@nader-ziada
Copy link
Contributor Author

/test pull-cluster-api-provider-azure-capi-e2e

@nader-ziada
Copy link
Contributor Author

/hold cancel

capi v03.10 release published

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot removed the do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. label Oct 1, 2020
@nader-ziada
Copy link
Contributor Author

all passed with final v0.3.10

@vincepri
Copy link
Member

vincepri commented Oct 1, 2020

LGTM

CecileRobertMichon
CecileRobertMichon approved these changes Oct 1, 2020
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@CecileRobertMichon CecileRobertMichon left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

/lgtm
/approve

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Oct 1, 2020
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: CecileRobertMichon

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 Oct 1, 2020
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot merged commit 4195d4c into kubernetes-sigs:master Oct 1, 2020
@nader-ziada nader-ziada deleted the capi-3-10-rc0 branch March 11, 2021 14:48
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@CecileRobertMichon CecileRobertMichon CecileRobertMichon approved these changes

@alexeldeib alexeldeib Awaiting requested review from alexeldeib

@cpanato cpanato Awaiting requested review from cpanato

Assignees

@CecileRobertMichon CecileRobertMichon

Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. area/provider/azure Issues or PRs related to azure 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. release-note Denotes a PR that will be considered when it comes time to generate release notes. sig/cluster-lifecycle Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Cluster Lifecycle. size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
5 participants
@nader-ziada @CecileRobertMichon @fabriziopandini @vincepri @k8s-ci-robot