Remove scheduler policy config and cc v1beta1

[kerthcet]

Enhancement Description

• One-line enhancement description (can be used as a release note): Remove scheduler policy config and mark cc v1beta1 as deprecated
• Kubernetes Enhancement Proposal: TODO
• Discussion Link: Deprecate Policy scheduling config kubernetes#92143
• Primary contact (assignee): @kerthcet
• Responsible SIGs: sig-scheduling
• Enhancement target (which target equals to which milestone):
  • Alpha release target (x.y):
  • Beta release target (x.y): 1.23
  • Stable release target (x.y):
• Alpha
  • KEP (k/enhancements) update PR(s): KEP-2901: remove scheduler policy and cc v1beta1 #2921
  • Code (k/k) update PR(s):
    • Remove v1beta1: remove scheduler component config v1beta1 kubernetes#104782
    • Remove scheduler policy config: remove scheduler policy config kubernetes#105424
    • Remove ServiceAffinity Plugin: Cleanup/remove service affinity plugin kubernetes#105588
    • Add integration test to cover event registration: sched: integration test to cover event registration kubernetes#105337
  • Docs (k/website) update PR(s): add introductions for scheduler component config api migrations website#30151

Please keep this description up to date. This will help the Enhancement Team to track the evolution of the enhancement efficiently.

[kerthcet]

/sig scheduling

[kerthcet]

KEP is in progress⚽️

[kerthcet]

/assign

[kerthcet]

Remove v1beta1 pending for review.

[kerthcet]

remove scheduler policy config is in draft now.

[Huang-Wei]

@kerthcet just a heads-up: when you work on "remove ServiceAffinity plugin", please also remove the event registration logic here:

https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/blob/0ac956ff2bef9c84b17d4b9cae2cffe71d5c6386/pkg/scheduler/eventhandlers.go#L417-L423

[kerthcet]

@kerthcet just a heads-up: when you work on "remove ServiceAffinity plugin", please also remove the event registration logic here:

https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/blob/0ac956ff2bef9c84b17d4b9cae2cffe71d5c6386/pkg/scheduler/eventhandlers.go#L417-L423

gotcha

[kerthcet]

remove plugin service-affinity pending for review.

[kerthcet]

sorry to disturb you @Huang-Wei , I was wondering whether LegacyRegistry and Policy should also be removed? thanks.

[Huang-Wei]

@kerthcet commented on the PR. We should get rid of the ServiceAffinity plugin only.

[Huang-Wei]

sorry to disturb you @Huang-Wei , I was wondering whether LegacyRegistry and Policy should also be removed? thanks.

@kerthcet Yes, we'd like to remove all Policy bits. Given it may involve a lot of API changes, would you mind leaving it to @ahg-g ?

[kerthcet]

sure, i think i can learn a lot from him also.

[kerthcet]

Since the last subtask about k/website docs is done, all the subtasks are finished now, I'll try to close this issue. Thanks for all you guys help.
/cc @Huang-Wei @ahg-g @alculquicondor @damemi

What's more, I'll open another pr about the policy config migration from v1beta2 -> v1beta3 in k/website as suggested later.

[alculquicondor]

/reopen

Do not close until all the tasks have been completed, including documentation.

Don't forget to open the PR against the dev-1.23 branch.

[k8s-ci-robot]

@alculquicondor: Reopened this issue.

In response to this:

/reopen

Do not close until all the tasks have been completed, including documentation.

Don't forge to open the PR against the dev-1.23 branch.

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.

[kerthcet]

since kubernetes/website#30404 is closed, close this issue then. cc @alculquicondor

[kerthcet]

/close

[k8s-ci-robot]

@kerthcet: Closing this issue.

In response to this:

/close

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.

[alculquicondor]

I just realized that this was opened under the enhancements repo. Since this was just a KEP update, rather than it's own KEP:

• It should link to the original KEP and its issue
• It shouldn't say alpha (the KEP is beta already)