Closed maboehm closed 4 months ago
Welcome @maboehm!
It looks like this is your first PR to kubernetes-sigs/prow π. Please refer to our pull request process documentation to help your PR have a smooth ride to approval.
You will be prompted by a bot to use commands during the review process. Do not be afraid to follow the prompts! It is okay to experiment. Here is the bot commands documentation.
You can also check if kubernetes-sigs/prow has its own contribution guidelines.
You may want to refer to our testing guide if you run into trouble with your tests not passing.
If you are having difficulty getting your pull request seen, please follow the recommended escalation practices. Also, for tips and tricks in the contribution process you may want to read the Kubernetes contributor cheat sheet. We want to make sure your contribution gets all the attention it needs!
Thank you, and welcome to Kubernetes. :smiley:
Hi @maboehm. Thanks for your PR.
I'm waiting for a kubernetes-sigs member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with /ok-to-test
on its own line. Until that is done, I will not automatically test new commits in this PR, but the usual testing commands by org members will still work. Regular contributors should join the org to skip this step.
Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the ok-to-test
label.
I understand the commands that are listed here.
Name | Link |
---|---|
Latest commit | 0ee99b9ee1bd56595519879d1e01224e0d74eceb |
Latest deploy log | https://app.netlify.com/sites/k8s-prow/deploys/667042ee55a39a0008078d05 |
Deploy Preview | https://deploy-preview-196--k8s-prow.netlify.app |
Preview on mobile | Toggle QR Code...Use your smartphone camera to open QR code link. |
To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify site configuration.
awesome @maboehm can you check the CLA?
Just an additional comment: we dont use the tekton stuff in our setup, so might be worth double checking (but I did check that the fields are in fact preserved, so confidence is high)
/ok-to-test
Do we know who's using the Tekton side in production? Could we get their input on this change? I think this is the right direction but I'm not sure if this would cause some hassle for them on upgrade.
It's been two weeks, should we just move forward?
It's been two weeks, should we just move forward?
I'd say yes. /approve /hold
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED
This pull-request has been approved by: maboehm, matthyx
The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.
The pull request process is described here
I agree
/lgtm /hold cancel
The CRD has become too large for standard kubernetes / etcd installations. With this change, the CRD generation is instructed to treat all
tektoncd
types as schema-less (while instructing the apiserver to keep unknown fields). This reduces the size down to around 500KBSeems like upstream, tekton is doing something similar, their CRD does not have a schema: https://github.com/tektoncd/pipeline/blob/main/config/300-crds/300-pipelinerun.yaml#L62-L72
I also updated the
admission
component to use strict validation and to be able to handle CREATE requests as well. With this component deployed, you would get at least some level of safety back, even if the response is a bit lacking right now:(I also did not see the admission component installed in https://github.com/kubernetes/test-infra/tree/master/config/prow so not sure who uses it. We dont have it in our env.)
Fixes https://github.com/kubernetes-sigs/prow/issues/181