kubevirt / ssp-operator

Operator that deploys additional KubeVirt resources
Apache License 2.0
29 stars 47 forks source link

fix: Correctly deploy instance types from URL #1032

Open akrejcir opened 1 month ago

akrejcir commented 1 month ago

What this PR does / why we need it: This PR fixes 2 issues:

Release note:

None
akrejcir commented 1 month ago

/cc @0xFelix @codingben @jcanocan

kubevirt-bot commented 1 month ago

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: Once this PR has been reviewed and has the lgtm label, please ask for approval from akrejcir. For more information see the Kubernetes Code Review Process.

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files: - **[OWNERS](https://github.com/kubevirt/ssp-operator/blob/main/OWNERS)** Approvers can indicate their approval by writing `/approve` in a comment Approvers can cancel approval by writing `/approve cancel` in a comment
akrejcir commented 1 month ago

Now I'm not sure if it was intentional that resources from URL are not reconciled. Let's wait for @lyarwood .

/hold

akrejcir commented 1 month ago

I've separated the first commit into separate PR #1033 , so we can merge it sooner.

openshift-ci[bot] commented 1 month ago

@akrejcir: The following test failed, say /retest to rerun all failed tests or /retest-required to rerun all mandatory failed tests:

Test name Commit Details Required Rerun command
ci/prow/e2e-upgrade-functests 8589145c793f06ba86ae918b9540e0e7f9fce3ca link true /test e2e-upgrade-functests

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard.

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available [here](https://git.k8s.io/community/contributors/guide/pull-requests.md). If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the [kubernetes-sigs/prow](https://github.com/kubernetes-sigs/prow/issues/new?title=Prow%20issue:) repository. I understand the commands that are listed [here](https://go.k8s.io/bot-commands).
codingben commented 1 month ago

I've separated the first commit into separate PR #1033 , so we can merge it sooner.

Will you rebase once the new PR is merged?

akrejcir commented 1 month ago

I will, but not yet. Let's wait for Lee to know if this PR solves a bug, or if it was intended. I don't want to waste CI.

codingben commented 1 month ago

I will, but not yet. Let's wait for Lee to know if this PR solves a bug, or if it was intended. I don't want to waste CI.

Sure thing. I'd rebase it and mark it as draft to disable CI.

sonarcloud[bot] commented 1 month ago

Quality Gate Passed Quality Gate passed

Issues
0 New issues
0 Accepted issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
0.0% Coverage on New Code
0.0% Duplication on New Code

See analysis details on SonarCloud

lyarwood commented 3 weeks ago

Now I'm not sure if it was intentional that resources from URL are not reconciled. Let's wait for @lyarwood .

Thanks for looking at this @akrejcir , I think my issue with continuously reconciling from the same URL was just the cost in building the resources each time. The call to kustomize is not cheap and would definitely slow down the time taken by SSP as a whole to reconcile.

With v0.21 out the door I wanted to finally remove this functionality from SSP anyway for v0.22. We can still land this PR to resolve the set, unset and set use case you set out in the description but for it to be useful we would then need to backport that all the way back to v0.19. I'm not sure it's worth the effort tbh.