🌱 Move experimental addon controllers to internal

[vibhorrawat]

What this PR does / why we need it:
Move experimental addon controllers to internal and added a shim (alias.go) for exposing Reconcilers

Which issue(s) this PR fixes (optional, in fixes #<issue number>(, fixes #<issue_number>, ...) format, will close the issue(s) when PR gets merged):
Ref #5455

[k8s-ci-robot]

Welcome @vibhorrawat!

It looks like this is your first PR to kubernetes-sigs/cluster-api 🎉. Please refer to our pull request process documentation to help your PR have a smooth ride to approval.

You will be prompted by a bot to use commands during the review process. Do not be afraid to follow the prompts! It is okay to experiment. Here is the bot commands documentation.

You can also check if kubernetes-sigs/cluster-api has its own contribution guidelines.

You may want to refer to our testing guide if you run into trouble with your tests not passing.

If you are having difficulty getting your pull request seen, please follow the recommended escalation practices. Also, for tips and tricks in the contribution process you may want to read the Kubernetes contributor cheat sheet. We want to make sure your contribution gets all the attention it needs!

Thank you, and welcome to Kubernetes. 😃

[k8s-ci-robot]

Hi @vibhorrawat. 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.

[sbueringer]

/ok-to-test

[vibhorrawat]

Two failures-
1- pull-cluster-api-apidiff-main Failed (Required = False)
Looking at the build logs and error suggests Incompatible changes-

*** Running go-apidiff ***
sigs.k8s.io/cluster-api/exp/addons/controllers/predicates
  Incompatible changes:
  - ResourceCreate: removed
sigs.k8s.io/cluster-api/exp/addons/controllers
  Incompatible changes:
  - (*ClusterResourceSetBindingReconciler).Reconcile: removed
  - (*ClusterResourceSetReconciler).ApplyClusterResourceSet: removed
  - (*ClusterResourceSetReconciler).Reconcile: removed
  - ErrSecretTypeNotSupported: removed

2- pull-cluster-api-verify-main Failed (Required = True)
Build logs suggest issue during make execution

 - apiGroups:
   - apiextensions.k8s.io
   resources:
@@ -229,15 +208,6 @@ rules:
   - patch
   - update
   - watch
-- apiGroups:
-  - ""
-  resources:
-  - configmaps
-  verbs:
-  - get
-  - list
-  - patch
-  - watch
 - apiGroups:
   - ""
   resources:
generated files are out of date, run make generate
make[1]: *** [Makefile:691: verify-gen] Error 1
make[1]: Leaving directory '/home/prow/go/src/sigs.k8s.io/cluster-api'
make: *** [Makefile:674: verify] Error 2

Any pointers to fix these?

[fabriziopandini]

1. don't worry about this, it is a non blocking check that reports changes in CAPI public APIs, and in case of this PR, they are expected given that we are moving stuff to internal
2. this should not happen. take a look at 🌱 Move docker controller to internal #5595 (comment), this problem should be similar

[fabriziopandini]

@vibhorrawat thanks for you fist contribution to Cluster API! Welcome to the team 🥳
changes lgtm pending green CI signal (verify only)

[sbueringer]

Same from my side. Thank you very much!

You have to add the following line:

		paths=./$(EXP_DIR)/addons/internal/... \

Below ~l.371

		paths=./$(EXP_DIR)/addons/controllers/... \

You can directly squash the change into your current commit.

P.S. You can also remove [WIP] from the PR title, that will make the verify GitHub workflows happy.

[sbueringer]

/lgtm

[vibhorrawat]

@fabriziopandini @sbueringer Thank you so much for the specific details that helped to fix the test failures. As of now, all the Required checks are passing. Kindly review and do the needful.

Looking forward for more of these to learn and familiarize myself with cluster-api 🎉

[fabriziopandini]

@vibhorrawat could you kindly fix one thing I forgot in the previous pass 😅

You should add this PR into API change documentation for provider implementers

[vibhorrawat]

You should add this PR into API change documentation for provider implementers

Done. Added the PR to API Change.
Kindly review.

@sbueringer your lgtm has been removed. Please re-review. 😄

[sbueringer]

Sure :)

/lgtm

[fabriziopandini]

/lgtm
/approve
yay!

[k8s-ci-robot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: fabriziopandini

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:

• OWNERS [fabriziopandini]

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

[fabriziopandini]

:-( rebase first

[k8s-ci-robot]

@vibhorrawat: The following test 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-cluster-api-apidiff-main	5f932b3	link	false	/test pull-cluster-api-apidiff-main

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/test-infra repository. I understand the commands that are listed here.

[vibhorrawat]

@fabriziopandini The conflicts are resolved now. Could you please re-review this one. @sbueringer Sorry for being such a pain, had to resolve the branch conflict. Kindly re-review.

[sbueringer]

@fabriziopandini The conflicts are resolved now. Could you please re-review this one. @sbueringer Sorry for being such a pain, had to resolve the branch conflict. Kindly re-review.

No worries :)

/lgtm