-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 6.5k
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 kube-ovn to use v1.12.28 #11728
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: bobz965 The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.
Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
Welcome @bobz965! |
Hi @bobz965. 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 Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the 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. |
/ok-to-test |
/uncc
|
HI @bobz965 |
done |
c363ed5
to
ede011d
Compare
kube_ovn_ic_autoroute: true | ||
kube_ovn_ic_dbhost: "127.0.0.1" | ||
kube_ovn_ic_auto_route: true | ||
kube_ovn_ic_db_host: "127.0.0.1" |
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.
Changing variable names is a breaking change => we should probably leave those alone
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.
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.
That's not it.
Files in defaults can be overridden by users in their inventory (that's their point). So if we change the variable name and use the new one, someone who had defined a value different from the default would silently reset to the default on upgrading.
It's ok to have breaking changes when there is a sufficiently ™️ benefit (or we just merged and it was not in a released version). But changing spacing is below the bar of usefulness for making a breaking change, IMO.
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.
ok,will roll back
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.
The deleted stuff here is just moving, right ? Best leave that for a separate PR, here it just make the PR bigger to review and obscures the actual changes
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.
Right, But I think using a small separate PR should be easier to maintain in the future.
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.
using a small separate PR
You meant a small separate file here I guess ?
Yes, why not, but there is no reason to do that split in this PR, it inflates it's size and make the diff unnecessary big
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.
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.
Hum, yeah, keeping in sync with upstream.
Ok let's keep it in the PR, but could you put the file split in a separate commit (preferably before the rest if possible).
This will make our history more readable for future readers.
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.
ok, will be in a a separate commit
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.
(Side note, not mandatory for this PR):
This isn't actually a template, so it should probably move to files/
instead.
- --default-provider-name={{ kube_ovn_default_provider_name | default('')}} | ||
- --default-interface-name={{ kube_ovn_default_vlan_interface_name | default('') }} | ||
- --default-vlan-id={{ kube_ovn_default_vlan_id | default('') }} | ||
- --default-vlan-name={{ kube_ovn_default_vlan_name | default('') }} |
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.
Avoid the use of default
where possible, just have the value defined in roles defaults/main.yml
@@ -580,7 +434,7 @@ spec: | |||
type: infra | |||
spec: | |||
priorityClassName: system-node-critical | |||
serviceAccountName: ovn | |||
serviceAccountName: kube-ovn-app | |||
hostPID: true |
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.
Is this safe to upgrade this way on running cluster ? If the sa changes, I suppose that will leave a dangling SA, right ?
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.
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.
Ah ok so it was using one before and now it's two ? Understood.
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.
Ah ok so it was using one before and now it's two ? Understood.
yes
Signed-off-by: bobz965 <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: bobz965 <[email protected]>
What type of PR is this?
/kind feature
What this PR does / why we need it:
[kube-ovn] update to v1.12.28
Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
Fixes #
Special notes for your reviewer:
Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?: