Add FAQ explaining potential false positives

[stepanstipl]

We should add FAQ section explaining false positives situations, which are likely not false (last-applied), as we get questions on this regularly. E.g.: ^1

[sidewinder12s]

With server side apply becoming more common, wouldn't those resources be missed by kubent since it does not rely on this annotation?

[mariusmagureanu]

Hi all,

I guess I'll be joining the party of confused people. I've been successfully using kubent for multiple k8s upgrade sessions.

Now I'm preparing for 1.26 and getting some false positives - I hope.

See the below snippet:

apiVersion: autoscaling/v2
kind: HorizontalPodAutoscaler
metadata:
  annotations:
    kubectl.kubernetes.io/last-applied-configuration: |
      {"apiVersion":"autoscaling/v2","kind":"HorizontalPodAutoscaler", ...
  creationTimestamp: "2023-01-17T20:59:33Z"
...

According to the snippet above I'd expect for that specific HPA to not be reported against upgrading to 1.26;

Am I misunderstanding something? If so, any pointer would be highly appreciated.

Otherwise, if this indeed is a bug I'd gladly contribute with a fix.

Thank you.

[github-actions[bot]]

This issue has not seen any activity in last 60 days, and has been marked as stale.

[madAndroid]

With server side apply becoming more common, wouldn't those resources be missed by kubent since it does not rely on this annotation?

This is the exact behaviour we're seeing, ArgoCD in our management cluster is applying changes with server-side-apply, and consequently we're seeing the false positives, since the resource itself doesn't match the annotation

[github-actions[bot]]

This issue has not seen any activity in last 60 days, and has been marked as stale.

[github-actions[bot]]

This issue was closed because it has been stalled for 90 days with no activity.

[naveenb29]

can confirm this this happening with HPA https://github.com/doitintl/kube-no-trouble/issues/528#issuecomment-1935538883