-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 492
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 v0.6.2 #1814
Release v0.6.2 #1814
Conversation
conformance: check reason in HTTPRouteInvalidCrossNamespaceParentRef test
test: add not matching sectioName test
…e-k8s.gcr.io-registry chore: replace usage of the deprecated k8s.gcr.io registry
…nd-error chore: cleanup err check in conformance tests
Log Generation / Observed generation.
Improve conformance test log message.
…ormance_observed_gen conformance: use Patch to make ObservedGeneration tests robust against conflicts
…mples fix: remove invalid redirect examples
…Routes conformance: add attachedRoutes to conformance tests
…olvedrefs-httproute conformance: HTTPRoute resolvedRefs condition always checked
Signed-off-by: Shane Utt <[email protected]>
Skipping CI for Draft Pull Request. |
…eConditionAccepted
running conformance with contour now, will update here on what goes on failing test failing test redirect tests that include the port number in expected |
Will consider @sunjayBhatia's upcoming report along with the reviews from @mlavacca and @robscott enough to unhold 👍 /unhold |
b9d5351
to
0822959
Compare
0822959
to
b9d5351
Compare
Kind: v1beta1.Kind("HTTPRoute"), | ||
}}, | ||
Conditions: []metav1.Condition{{ | ||
Type: string(v1beta1.ListenerConditionAccepted), |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
coincidentally this is the first conformance test that actually asserts on ListenerConditionAccepted
so it might cause a little friction, there are a few tests using Programmed
for similar assertions (e.g. GatewaySecretReferenceGrantAllInNamespace
)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
As I understand it this is more of a calling out than a request for change. Let me know if I'm misunderstood, however.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
yeah just a callout in case anyone else sees an issue with it
…ndition-fix resolvedRefs condition additional checks
/unhold |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
/lgtm
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: mlavacca, shaneutt, sunjayBhatia 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 |
What type of PR is this?
/kind test
What this PR does / why we need it:
This adds the content for the
v0.6.2
release.