Skip to content

Navigation Menu

Sign in
Appearance settings

Search code, repositories, users, issues, pull requests...

Provide feedback

We read every piece of feedback, and take your input very seriously.

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Sign up
Appearance settings

Comments

Ensure unique paths for excluded fields in compatibility requirement#2720

Open
JoelSpeed wants to merge 1 commit intoopenshift:master from
JoelSpeed:unique-excluded-paths
Open

Ensure unique paths for excluded fields in compatibility requirement #2720
JoelSpeed wants to merge 1 commit intoopenshift:master from
JoelSpeed:unique-excluded-paths

Conversation

@JoelSpeed
Copy link
Contributor

@JoelSpeed JoelSpeed commented Feb 19, 2026

I can't currently think of any reason why we wouldn't want these to be unique. There are two dimensions here, path and versions. If you want to specify the same path for multiple versions, this can be done within a single list item. If you want to specify for all versions, you omit the versions field completely.

Ensuring these are unique means we don't have to worry about deduplicating within the webhook logic

CC @mdbooth

Copy link

Pipeline controller notification
This repo is configured to use the pipeline controller. Second-stage tests will be triggered either automatically or after lgtm label is added, depending on the repository configuration. The pipeline controller will automatically detect which contexts are required and will utilize /test Prow commands to trigger the second stage.

For optional jobs, comment /test ? to see a list of all defined jobs. To trigger manually all jobs from second stage use /pipeline required command.

This repository is configured in: LGTM mode

Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Feb 19, 2026

Hello @JoelSpeed! Some important instructions when contributing to openshift/api:
API design plays an important part in the user experience of OpenShift and as such API PRs are subject to a high level of scrutiny to ensure they follow our best practices. If you haven't already done so, please review the OpenShift API Conventions and ensure that your proposed changes are compliant. Following these conventions will help expedite the api review process for your PR.

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files. label Feb 19, 2026
Copy link
Contributor Author

/test verify

I'm unable to see why this failed, the file it is asking to track is already tracked 🤔

Copy link

i Your monthly quota for Qodo has expired. Upgrade your plan 
i Paying users. Check that your Qodo account is linked with this Git user account

Comment on lines +192 to 193
// +kubebuilder:validation:XValidation:rule="self.all(x, self.exists_one(y, y.path == x.path))",message="each path in the list must be unique."
// +listType=atomic
Copy link
Contributor

@everettraven everettraven Feb 19, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Any particular reason why this needs to be an atomic list instead of converting this to +listType=map with a key of path?

Copy link
Contributor Author

@JoelSpeed JoelSpeed Feb 19, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

We had this discussion on the initial PR, we explicitly expect the writer to this API to write this list as an atomic unit. We aren't expecting multiple writers for this list ever. So atomic makes more sense based on the expected use case

everettraven reacted with thumbs up emoji
Copy link
Contributor

@everettraven everettraven left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

/lgtm

Holding in case @mdbooth has any inputs

/hold

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. label Feb 19, 2026
@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Feb 19, 2026
Copy link

Scheduling tests matching the pipeline_run_if_changed or not excluded by pipeline_skip_if_only_changed parameters:
/test e2e-aws-ovn
/test e2e-aws-ovn-hypershift
/test e2e-aws-ovn-hypershift-conformance
/test e2e-aws-ovn-techpreview
/test e2e-aws-serial-1of2
/test e2e-aws-serial-2of2
/test e2e-aws-serial-techpreview-1of2
/test e2e-aws-serial-techpreview-2of2
/test e2e-azure
/test e2e-gcp
/test e2e-upgrade
/test e2e-upgrade-out-of-change
/test minor-e2e-upgrade-minor

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Feb 19, 2026
Copy link
Contributor

mdbooth commented Feb 20, 2026

/lgtm

2 incidentallies:

I'm a bit surprised that CEL doesn't give us a uniqueness check that's better than O(n2). Doesn't matter too much here with a maximum list length of 64, but still a bit jarring.

I would still uniquify this in the controller: it's trivial to do anyway. This is a UX (well, developer X) improvement, but the controller should be defensive of non-local constraints. A different controller acting on a change in a different repo is most definitely non-local.

Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Feb 20, 2026

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: everettraven , mdbooth

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:
  • (削除) OWNERS (削除ここまで) [everettraven]

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

Copy link
Contributor

mdbooth commented Feb 20, 2026

Removing @everettraven 's hold as he said he was only waiting for me

/hold cancel

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot removed the do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. label Feb 20, 2026
Copy link
Contributor Author

/retest

Copy link
Contributor Author

/retest
/verified by integration tests

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the verified Signifies that the PR passed pre-merge verification criteria label Feb 23, 2026
Copy link

@JoelSpeed: This PR has been marked as verified by integration tests.

Details

In response to this:

/retest
/verified by integration tests

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 openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository.

Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Feb 23, 2026

@JoelSpeed: all tests passed!

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard.

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-sigs/prow repository. I understand the commands that are listed here.

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

Reviewers

@everettraven everettraven everettraven approved these changes

@deads2k deads2k Awaiting requested review from deads2k

Labels

approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files. verified Signifies that the PR passed pre-merge verification criteria

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

AltStyle によって変換されたページ (->オリジナル) /