-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 14.5k
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
Update feature gates for 1.22 #28644
Conversation
👷 Deploy Preview for kubernetes-io-vnext-staging processing. 🔨 Explore the source changes: 372d34d 🔍 Inspect the deploy log: https://app.netlify.com/sites/kubernetes-io-vnext-staging/deploys/60dee872c982750007cf564a |
@PI-Victor FYI |
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.
I suggested a few corrections
content/en/docs/reference/command-line-tools-reference/feature-gates.md
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
| `CSINodeInfo` | `false` | Alpha | 1.12 | 1.13 | | ||
| `CSINodeInfo` | `true` | Beta | 1.14 | 1.16 | | ||
| `CSINodeInfo` | `true` | GA | 1.17 | | | ||
| `CSIPersistentVolume` | `false` | Alpha | 1.9 | 1.9 | | ||
| `CSIPersistentVolume` | `true` | Beta | 1.10 | 1.12 | | ||
| `CSIPersistentVolume` | `true` | GA | 1.13 | - | | ||
| `CSIServiceAccountToken` | `false` | Alpha | 1.20 | 1.20 | | ||
| `CSIServiceAccountToken` | `true` | Beta | 1.21 | 1.21 | | ||
| `CSIServiceAccountToken` | `true` | GA| 1.22 | | |
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.
mini-nit:
| `CSIServiceAccountToken` | `true` | GA| 1.22 | | | |
| `CSIServiceAccountToken` | `true` | GA | 1.22 | | |
content/en/docs/reference/command-line-tools-reference/feature-gates.md
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
905dab9
to
430d05c
Compare
430d05c
to
e9ace31
Compare
e9ace31
to
993cc7b
Compare
993cc7b
to
3b74745
Compare
/remove-area blog |
can we get this merged so it's no longer needed to constantly rebase? |
LGTM label has been added. Git tree hash: 414598ed3c0590207841e5fb76a0c70e99e30301
|
d51f775
to
c78ae63
Compare
Some more changes coming in ... The
|
c78ae63
to
0d5817c
Compare
Alright, here is another one: APIServerTracing kubernetes/kubernetes#94942 |
This PR updates the feature gate status based on upstream implementation. The chanegs are listed below with links to upstream PRs merged: - BalanceAttacedNodeVolumes kubernetes/kubernetes#102443 - CSIMigrationvSphereComplete kubernetes/kubernetes#101272 - CSIServiceAccountToken kubernetes/kubernetes#103001 - DaemonSetUpdateSurge kubernetes/kubernetes#101742 - DisableCloudProviders kubernetes/kubernetes#100136 - IndexedJob kubernetes/kubernetes#101292 - LegacyNodeRoleBehavior kubernetes/kubernetes#100776 - NamespaceDefaultLabelName kubernetes/kubernetes#101342 - NetworkPolicyEndPort kubernetes/kubernetes#102834 - NodeDisruptionExclusion kubernetes/kubernetes#100776 - PodAffinityNamespaceSelector kubernetes/kubernetes#101496 - PodDeletionCost kubernetes/kubernetes#101080 - PreferNominatedNode kubernetes/kubernetes#102201 - ServiceLoadBalancerClass kubernetes/kubernetes#103129 - ServiceNodeExclusion kubernetes/kubernetes#100776 - ServiceTopology kubernetes/kubernetes#102412 - SizeMemoryBackedVoluems kubernetes/kubernetes#101048 - StatefulSetMinReadySeconds kubernetes/kubernetes#100842 - SuspendJob kubernetes/kubernetes#102022 - WindowsHostProcessContainers kubernetes/kubernetes#99576
0d5817c
to
372d34d
Compare
Got a new one: |
💭 if there was a single document listing all known feature gates for Kubernetes - doesn't have to list anything else, just the names would do - then the code integration checks could error out if any component supports an unrecognized gate name. (maybe something like that already happens?) |
@sftim That would be very difficult due to the fact that the several sources of kube-features are co-owned by many SIGs. One workaround, unlikely to happen though, is to have a working group supervising all feature changes. Such a working group may be sig-release or a different SIG dedicated to this cross-SIG coordination. Before that, we have to constantly remind the contributors to add/update documentation for feature stage changes. Otherwise, it falls on our shoulder to track these changes. |
Also relevant: issue #28787 ( |
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
(we can do a follow-up PR if we want to)
LGTM label has been added. Git tree hash: 89a46fde0b66803a9b73b821758093a60dcf9ed1
|
/approve |
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: PI-Victor 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 |
This PR updates the feature gate status based on upstream
implementation.
The chanegs are listed below with links to upstream PRs merged: