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.

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

Revert backwards incompatible changes #224

Conversation

apelisse
Copy link
Contributor

@apelisse apelisse commented Aug 1, 2022

Can we live with that? Everything still passes, but at least we don't have to bump the major, so any backport/cherry-pick will be much easier to sell.

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. label Aug 1, 2022
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: apelisse

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 approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files. labels Aug 1, 2022
lockOnce sync.Once
// Lock which protects writes to resolvedTypes. Used as pointer so that
// schema may be used as a value type
lock *sync.Mutex
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Do we need all these locks here? Can we make the lock by value since we're not supposed to copy a schema?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

yeah there were no unsafe schema usages in the ptr semantics refactor nor in k8s/openapi usage

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

can remove the once. just need the lock

@alexzielenski
Copy link
Contributor

/hold

tentative lgtm

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. label Aug 2, 2022
@alexzielenski
Copy link
Contributor

/unhold
/lgtm

@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 Aug 2, 2022
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Aug 2, 2022
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot merged commit 26781d0 into kubernetes-sigs:master Aug 2, 2022
@apelisse
Copy link
Contributor Author

apelisse commented Aug 2, 2022

OK I've tried to fix the tags, done this:

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. 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. size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants