-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 104
Add conversion webhook for v1 #947
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.
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
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
✅ Deploy Preview for kubernetes-sigs-jobset ready!
To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify project configuration. |
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: imreddy13 The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. DetailsNeeds approval from an approver in each of these files:Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
|
Hi @imreddy13. 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 Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the I understand the commands that are listed here. DetailsInstructions 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. |
|
/ok-to-test |
| @@ -0,0 +1,21 @@ | |||
| /* | |||
| Copyright 2023 The Kubernetes Authors. | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
| Copyright 2023 The Kubernetes Authors. | |
| Copyright 2025 The Kubernetes Authors. |
| @@ -0,0 +1,420 @@ | |||
| /* | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thank you for driving this @imreddy13!
Can we discuss all of the breaking changes to the JobSet APIs before introducing the V1 please ?
I feel like we have a few open discussions that we need to resolve before the v1, for example:
- Remove StartupPolicy API in favour of DependsOn
- Rename JobSet status to Complete #723
- Make ReplicatedJobs a custom resource with their own controller #946
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
#946 Would involve a significant refactor/rewrite of much of the codebase, so it could probably wait til v2 as @GiuseppeTT pointed out.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Shall we consider to have v1alpha2 API before the v1 API to deprecate several APIs ?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
cc @danielvegamyhre for visibility
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
That makes sense.
My only recommendation is that we maintain consistency across JobSet status fields.
Which means if we maintain ReplicatedJobsStatus field, keep the IndividualJobsStatus field, where we define:
type IndividualJobStatus struct {
Name string `json:"name"`
Recreates int32 `json:"recreates"`
}There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I agree with that. @carreter would you be up for making that change?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think we can do this in v1alpha2 since we did not yet release this change.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I agree with that. @carreter would you be up for making that change?
Sure, I'll take a stab at it! Makes sense to try and keep it consistent.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
|
/hold You mentioned this is still a draft offline. |
|
cc @tchap @ardaguclu I mentioned this work to you all so just wanted you to be aware. |
|
The Kubernetes project currently lacks enough contributors to adequately respond to all PRs. This bot triages PRs according to the following rules:
You can:
Please send feedback to sig-contributor-experience at kubernetes/community. /lifecycle stale |
|
@imreddy13: The following tests failed, say
Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard. Please help us cut down on flakes by linking to an open issue when you hit one in your PR. DetailsInstructions 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. |
|
The Kubernetes project currently lacks enough active contributors to adequately respond to all PRs. This bot triages PRs according to the following rules:
You can:
Please send feedback to sig-contributor-experience at kubernetes/community. /lifecycle rotten |
What type of PR is this?
What this PR does / why we need it:
Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
Fixes #
Special notes for your reviewer:
Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?