Skip to content

Conversation

@theobarberbany
Copy link
Contributor

What type of PR is this?

/kind cleanup

Version vump

What this PR does / why we need it:

Bumps sigs.k8s.io/pkg/azclient to the latest version. This is to include changes from #5643

Which issue(s) this PR fixes:

Fixes #5558

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.:

NONE

@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. cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. needs-ok-to-test Indicates a PR that requires an org member to verify it is safe to test. labels Mar 12, 2024
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot requested a review from feiskyer March 12, 2024 10:44
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

Hi @theobarberbany. 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.

Details

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 requested a review from nilo19 March 12, 2024 10:44
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the size/S Denotes a PR that changes 10-29 lines, ignoring generated files. label Mar 12, 2024
@JoelSpeed
Copy link
Contributor

Seems innocuous
/lgtm

Curious to know why this is a separate go module, wonder if one of the maintainers can explain why the clients need this bump separately, any way to work around it? Perhaps with go workspaces to avoid the needed bump?

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files. and removed lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. size/S Denotes a PR that changes 10-29 lines, ignoring generated files. labels Mar 12, 2024
@JoelSpeed
Copy link
Contributor

/lgtm

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Mar 12, 2024
@bridgetkromhout
Copy link

/ok-to-test

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added ok-to-test Indicates a non-member PR verified by an org member that is safe to test. needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. and removed needs-ok-to-test Indicates a PR that requires an org member to verify it is safe to test. labels Mar 12, 2024
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot removed lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. labels Mar 13, 2024
@JoelSpeed
Copy link
Contributor

/lgtm

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Mar 13, 2024
@theobarberbany
Copy link
Contributor Author

{Unexpected error:
    <wait.errInterrupted>: 
    timed out waiting for the condition
    {
        cause: <*errors.errorString | 0xc000269a10>{
            s: "timed out waiting for the condition",
        },
    }
occurred failed [FAILED] Unexpected error:
    <wait.errInterrupted>: 
    timed out waiting for the condition
    {
        cause: <*errors.errorString | 0xc000269a10>{
            s: "timed out waiting for the condition",
        },
    }
occurred
In [It] at: /home/prow/go/src/sigs.k8s.io/cloud-provider-azure/tests/e2e/network/service_annotations.go:960 @ 03/13/24 12:40:51.061

}

Looks like there's a timeout - guessing it may be a flake or have something to do with the cloud being slow? Going to retry.

@theobarberbany
Copy link
Contributor Author

/test pull-cloud-provider-azure-e2e-ccm-vmss-ip-lb-capz

@theobarberbany
Copy link
Contributor Author

Hey @nilo19

A review would be greatly appreciated! :D

@nilo19
Copy link
Contributor

nilo19 commented Mar 14, 2024

/lgtm
/approve

@nilo19
Copy link
Contributor

nilo19 commented Mar 14, 2024

/cherrypick release-1.29

@k8s-infra-cherrypick-robot

@nilo19: once the present PR merges, I will cherry-pick it on top of release-1.29 in a new PR and assign it to you.

Details

In response to this:

/cherrypick release-1.29

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
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: nilo19, theobarberbany

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

The pull request process is described here

Details 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 Mar 14, 2024
@MartinForReal
Copy link
Contributor

/retest

@MartinForReal
Copy link
Contributor

The clients will be used in 4 branches. And we don't want to maintain 4 copies of azclient.

@JoelSpeed
Copy link
Contributor

The clients will be used in 4 branches. And we don't want to maintain 4 copies of azclient.

So the idea is that the client library will be able to be used across all supported versions of the CCM, but only actually maintained on the master branch? Gotcha

Bumps sigs.k8s.io/pkg/azclient to the latest version
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot removed the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Mar 15, 2024
@JoelSpeed
Copy link
Contributor

/lgtm

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Mar 15, 2024
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot merged commit f966eef into kubernetes-sigs:master Mar 15, 2024
@k8s-infra-cherrypick-robot

@nilo19: #5651 failed to apply on top of branch "release-1.29":

Applying: Bumps azclient to latest version
Using index info to reconstruct a base tree...
M	go.mod
M	go.sum
Falling back to patching base and 3-way merge...
Auto-merging go.sum
CONFLICT (content): Merge conflict in go.sum
Auto-merging go.mod
error: Failed to merge in the changes.
hint: Use 'git am --show-current-patch=diff' to see the failed patch
Patch failed at 0001 Bumps azclient to latest version
When you have resolved this problem, run "git am --continue".
If you prefer to skip this patch, run "git am --skip" instead.
To restore the original branch and stop patching, run "git am --abort".

Details

In response to this:

/cherrypick release-1.29

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.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

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/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. ok-to-test Indicates a non-member PR verified by an org member that is safe to test. release-note-none Denotes a PR that doesn't merit a release note. size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files.

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Failure to initialize on Azure Stack for v1.29

7 participants