Closed cdmikechen closed 1 year ago
Merging #1071 (a9ed15d) into master (be4ecf2) will not change coverage. The diff coverage is
n/a
.
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #1071 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 75.98% 75.98%
=======================================
Files 119 119
Lines 5000 5000
=======================================
Hits 3799 3799
Misses 1201 1201
Flag | Coverage Δ | |
---|---|---|
python-integration | 59.72% <ø> (ø) |
|
python-unit | 52.48% <ø> (ø) |
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.
:mega: We’re building smart automated test selection to slash your CI/CD build times. Learn more
@pingsutw Hi~ For this PR, could you have time to do a validation in a k8s 1.25 environment (minikube or rancher) will work?
What is this PR for?
PodSecurityPolicy
will be removed in k8s 1.25 https://kubernetes.io/docs/reference/using-api/deprecation-guide/#psp-v125So that we need to remove the
PodSecurityPolicy
support in 1.25 and try to use other ways to handlerunAsUser
. https://kubernetes.io/docs/tasks/configure-pod-container/migrate-from-psp/ https://kubernetes.io/docs/concepts/security/pod-security-admission/What type of PR is it?
Improvement
Todos
podSecurityPolicy.create
default value to falsePodSecurityPolicy
toPod Security Admission
(PCA) in 1.25What is the Jira issue?
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SUBMARINE-1131
How should this be tested?
CI test
Screenshots (if appropriate)
Questions: