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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Remove scheduler's legacy policy config #105828

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Oct 25, 2021
Merged

Remove scheduler's legacy policy config #105828

merged 1 commit into from
Oct 25, 2021

Conversation

ahg-g
Copy link
Member

@ahg-g ahg-g commented Oct 21, 2021

What type of PR is this?

/kind cleanup

What this PR does / why we need it:

Removes the remaining parts of the legacy policy config api. This api is unaddressable via current flags/config files, so safe to remove.

Which issue(s) this PR fixes:

Part of #92143

Special notes for your reviewer:

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?

NONE

Additional documentation e.g., KEPs (Kubernetes Enhancement Proposals), usage docs, etc.:

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added release-note-none Denotes a PR that doesn't merit a release note. kind/cleanup Categorizes issue or PR as related to cleaning up code, process, or technical debt. size/XXL Denotes a PR that changes 1000+ lines, ignoring generated files. cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. do-not-merge/needs-sig Indicates an issue or PR lacks a `sig/foo` label and requires one. labels Oct 21, 2021
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

@ahg-g: This issue is currently awaiting triage.

If a SIG or subproject determines this is a relevant issue, they will accept it by applying the triage/accepted label and provide further guidance.

The triage/accepted label can be added by org members by writing /triage accepted in a comment.

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.

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added needs-triage Indicates an issue or PR lacks a `triage/foo` label and requires one. needs-priority Indicates a PR lacks a `priority/foo` label and requires one. labels Oct 21, 2021
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added sig/scheduling Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Scheduling. and removed do-not-merge/needs-sig Indicates an issue or PR lacks a `sig/foo` label and requires one. labels Oct 21, 2021
@k8s-triage-robot
Copy link

This PR may require API review.

If so, when the changes are ready, complete the pre-review checklist and request an API review.

Status of requested reviews is tracked in the API Review project.

@ahg-g ahg-g force-pushed the ahg-legacy branch 2 times, most recently from 1671fed to 8e71ca7 Compare October 25, 2021 00:59
@ahg-g
Copy link
Member Author

ahg-g commented Oct 25, 2021

/label api-review

@liggitt this is the followup PR that removes the whole legacy types.

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the api-review Categorizes an issue or PR as actively needing an API review. label Oct 25, 2021
@ahg-g
Copy link
Member Author

ahg-g commented Oct 25, 2021

/assign @Huang-Wei

@ahg-g ahg-g mentioned this pull request Oct 25, 2021
Closed
@liggitt
Copy link
Member

liggitt commented Oct 25, 2021

/lgtm
/approve

@liggitt liggitt added this to the v1.23 milestone Oct 25, 2021
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Oct 25, 2021
@liggitt liggitt added this to API review completed, 1.23 in API Reviews Oct 25, 2021
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: ahg-g, liggitt

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 the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Oct 25, 2021
Huang-Wei
Huang-Wei reviewed Oct 25, 2021
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@Huang-Wei Huang-Wei left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM overall, just one minor question.

staging/src/k8s.io/kube-scheduler/config/v1beta2/types.go
CertData []byte `json:"certData,omitempty"`
// KeyData holds PEM-encoded bytes (typically read from a client certificate key file).
// KeyData takes precedence over KeyFile
KeyData []byte `json:"keyData,omitempty"`
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@liggitt do you happen to know if we need to include datapolicy:"security-key" into the json tag? (example here)

And, should we keep the "datapolicy" tag for the unversioned types.go?

kubernetes/pkg/scheduler/apis/config/types.go

Lines 314 to 316 in f08ad3e

// KeyData holds PEM-encoded bytes (typically read from a client certificate key file).
// KeyData takes precedence over KeyFile
KeyData []byte `datapolicy:"security-key"`

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This PR should be a no-op, since it's just replicating the existing versioned type. I'm not sure what the current state of the datapolicy tags is... a follow-up to address that, tagging in the KEP implementers would be best

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot merged commit 6166203 into kubernetes:master Oct 25, 2021
@mengjiao-liu mengjiao-liu mentioned this pull request Oct 27, 2021
Closed
@damemi damemi mentioned this pull request Jan 4, 2022
Merged
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@liggitt liggitt liggitt left review comments

@Huang-Wei Huang-Wei Huang-Wei left review comments

@adtac adtac Awaiting requested review from adtac

@deads2k deads2k Awaiting requested review from deads2k

Assignees

@liggitt liggitt

@Huang-Wei Huang-Wei

Labels
api-review Categorizes an issue or PR as actively needing an API review. 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. kind/api-change Categorizes issue or PR as related to adding, removing, or otherwise changing an API kind/cleanup Categorizes issue or PR as related to cleaning up code, process, or technical debt. lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. needs-priority Indicates a PR lacks a `priority/foo` label and requires one. needs-triage Indicates an issue or PR lacks a `triage/foo` label and requires one. release-note-none Denotes a PR that doesn't merit a release note. sig/scheduling Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Scheduling. size/XXL Denotes a PR that changes 1000+ lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
API Reviews
Status: API review completed, 1.23
Milestone
v1.23
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet
5 participants
@ahg-g @k8s-ci-robot @k8s-triage-robot @liggitt @Huang-Wei