Skip to content

Remove DynamicKubeletConfig from init and join workflow #70849

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom
Merged
k8s-ci-robot merged 1 commit into from
Nov 13, 2018
Merged

Remove DynamicKubeletConfig from init and join workflow #70849

k8s-ci-robot merged 1 commit into from
Nov 13, 2018

Conversation

@yagonobre
Copy link
Member

@yagonobre yagonobre commented Nov 9, 2018 •
edited
Loading

What type of PR is this?
/kind feature

What this PR does / why we need it:
Remove DynamicKubeletConfig from init and join workflow, this also remove the DynamicKubeletConfig feature gate.

kubeadm: deprecate the DynamicKubeletConfig feature gate. The functionality is still accessible by using the kubeadm alpha kubelet enable-dynamic command.

/sig cluster-lifecycle
/priority important-soon
/assign @timothysc @fabriziopandini @neolit123
@kubernetes/sig-cluster-lifecycle-pr-reviews

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the release-note Denotes a PR that will be considered when it comes time to generate release notes. label Nov 9, 2018
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added sig/cluster-lifecycle Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Cluster Lifecycle. kind/feature Categorizes issue or PR as related to a new feature. priority/important-soon Must be staffed and worked on either currently, or very soon, ideally in time for the next release. size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files. cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. labels Nov 9, 2018
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

k8s-ci-robot commented Nov 9, 2018

Hi @yagonobre. Thanks for your PR.

I'm waiting for a kubernetes 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
Copy link
Contributor

k8s-ci-robot commented Nov 9, 2018

@yagonobre: Reiterating the mentions to trigger a notification:
@kubernetes/sig-cluster-lifecycle-pr-reviews

Details

In response to this:

What type of PR is this?
/kind feature

What this PR does / why we need it:
Remove DynamicKubeletConfig from init and join workflow, this also remove the DynamicKubeletConfig feature gate.

kubeadm: remove DynamicKubeletConfig from init and join workflow, also remove the DynamicKubeletConfig feature gate.

/sig cluster-lifecycle
/priority important-soon
/assign @timothysc @fabriziopandini @neolit123
@kubernetes/sig-cluster-lifecycle-pr-reviews

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 added the needs-ok-to-test Indicates a PR that requires an org member to verify it is safe to test. label Nov 9, 2018
@yagonobre
Copy link
Member Author

yagonobre commented Nov 9, 2018

/remove-kind feature
/kind cleanup

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added kind/cleanup Categorizes issue or PR as related to cleaning up code, process, or technical debt. and removed kind/feature Categorizes issue or PR as related to a new feature. labels Nov 9, 2018
@neolit123
Copy link
Member

neolit123 commented Nov 9, 2018

@yagonobre @fabriziopandini
i think we should move it to it's new location in the same PR?

@neolit123 neolit123 mentioned this pull request Nov 9, 2018
Closed
17 tasks
@yagonobre
Copy link
Member Author

yagonobre commented Nov 9, 2018

@neolit123 we already have kubelet config enable-dynamic on alpha cmd

@neolit123
Copy link
Member

neolit123 commented Nov 9, 2018

we already have kubelet config enable-dynamic on alpha cmd

missed it.
ok then this PR is fine.

@neolit123
Copy link
Member

neolit123 commented Nov 9, 2018

/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. and removed needs-ok-to-test Indicates a PR that requires an org member to verify it is safe to test. labels Nov 9, 2018
neolit123
neolit123 approved these changes Nov 9, 2018
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@neolit123 neolit123 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM thanks @yagonobre

@neolit123
Copy link
Member

neolit123 commented Nov 9, 2018

we probably need a release note for the removal of the feature gate, at least.
@fabriziopandini @yagonobre

@yagonobre
Copy link
Member Author

yagonobre commented Nov 9, 2018

@neolit123 any suggestion? I'm using kubeadm: remove DynamicKubeletConfig from init and join workflow, also remove the DynamicKubeletConfig feature gate.

@neolit123
Copy link
Member

neolit123 commented Nov 9, 2018

please use this:

kubeadm: deprecate the DynamicKubeletConfig feature gate. The functionality is still accessible by using the kubeadm alpha kubelet enable-dynamic command.

neolit123
neolit123 reviewed Nov 9, 2018
View reviewed changes
cmd/kubeadm/app/features/features.go Outdated
Copy link
Member

@neolit123 neolit123 Nov 9, 2018 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

sorry, just realized that we cannot remove it directly given the gate is BETA already.

we have to fist deprecate it and keep it around for 1 release:
https://github.com/kubernetes/website/blob/master/content/en/docs/reference/using-api/deprecation-policy.md#deprecation

i tried to explain that in the last two meetings.

/hold
/assign @timothysc

Copy link
Member Author

@yagonobre yagonobre Nov 9, 2018

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

What we will do? Reopen the phase pr and mark the feature gate as deprecated?

Copy link
Member

@neolit123 neolit123 Nov 9, 2018

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

i will leave to the others for further comments.
@luxas @fabriziopandini

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. kind/feature Categorizes issue or PR as related to a new feature. labels Nov 9, 2018
@yagonobre
Copy link
Member Author

yagonobre commented Nov 9, 2018

@neolit123 done!

@fabriziopandini fabriziopandini mentioned this pull request Nov 10, 2018
Closed
fabriziopandini
fabriziopandini approved these changes Nov 10, 2018
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@fabriziopandini fabriziopandini left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@yagonobre thanks for this PR!
/approve

@neolit123 @timothysc my taking from https://github.com/kubernetes/website/blob/master/content/en/docs/reference/using-api/deprecation-policy.md#deprecation is that we can remove the feature but we should keep the feature gate and give a warning for some time.

As per Lucas comment #70024 (review), my suggestion is to unblock this PR and tackle the feature gate warning thing once for all flags in the upcoming PR.

I opened kubernetes/kubeadm#1226 to track this issue in the milestone.

@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

k8s-ci-robot commented Nov 10, 2018

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: fabriziopandini, yagonobre

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 approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. labels Nov 10, 2018
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot removed the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Nov 12, 2018
@yagonobre yagonobre force-pushed the rm-dynamic-kubelet branch 2 times, most recently from 2f3a008 to 22a772b Compare November 12, 2018 12:49
@yagonobre
Copy link
Member Author

yagonobre commented Nov 12, 2018

/retest

1 similar comment
@yagonobre
Copy link
Member Author

yagonobre commented Nov 12, 2018

/retest

@yagonobre yagonobre force-pushed the rm-dynamic-kubelet branch 2 times, most recently from 91fe778 to eb3ae7e Compare November 12, 2018 17:11
@fabriziopandini
Copy link
Member

fabriziopandini commented Nov 13, 2018

/milestone v1.13

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added this to the v1.13 milestone Nov 13, 2018
@neolit123
Copy link
Member

neolit123 commented Nov 13, 2018

/lgtm
tracking of deprecated FGs in: kubernetes/kubeadm#1226

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Nov 13, 2018
@neolit123
Copy link
Member

neolit123 commented Nov 13, 2018

/hold cancel

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot removed the do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. label Nov 13, 2018
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot merged commit 9199025 into kubernetes:master Nov 13, 2018
@yagonobre yagonobre deleted the rm-dynamic-kubelet branch November 13, 2018 16:55
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@kad kad Awaiting requested review from kad

@stealthybox stealthybox Awaiting requested review from stealthybox

2 more reviewers

@neolit123 neolit123 neolit123 approved these changes

@fabriziopandini fabriziopandini fabriziopandini approved these changes

Reviewers whose approvals may not affect merge requirements

Assignees

@timothysc timothysc

@neolit123 neolit123

@fabriziopandini fabriziopandini

Labels

approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. area/kubeadm 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. kind/feature Categorizes issue or PR as related to a new feature. 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. priority/important-soon Must be staffed and worked on either currently, or very soon, ideally in time for the next release. release-note Denotes a PR that will be considered when it comes time to generate release notes. sig/cluster-lifecycle Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Cluster Lifecycle. size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files.

Projects

None yet

Milestone

v1.13

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants

@yagonobre @k8s-ci-robot @neolit123 @fabriziopandini @timothysc