Skip to content

Conversation

@qiujian16
Copy link
Member

@qiujian16 qiujian16 commented Jan 21, 2026

Summary

Related issue(s)

Fixes #

Summary by CodeRabbit

New Features

  • Added configurable feedback monitoring mode to addon templates and manifest work configurations. Users can now choose between Poll and Watch modes for resource feedback collection, with Poll as the default option.

✏️ Tip: You can customize this high-level summary in your review settings.

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot requested review from deads2k and jnpacker January 21, 2026 06:30
@coderabbitai
Copy link

coderabbitai bot commented Jan 21, 2026

Walkthrough

Adds a new feedbackScrapeType field across multiple CRD schemas and Go type definitions to support configurable feedback monitoring modes (Poll or Watch). The field is consistently defined with a string type, enum constraint, and Poll default value.

Changes

Cohort / File(s) Summary
CRD Schema Updates
addon/v1alpha1/0000_03_addon.open-cluster-management.io_addontemplates.crd.yaml, work/v1/0000_00_work.open-cluster-management.io_manifestworks.crd.yaml, work/v1alpha1/0000_00_work.open-cluster-management.io_manifestworkreplicasets.crd.yaml
Introduces feedbackScrapeType field (string, enum: Poll|Watch, default: Poll) to feedback rule configurations in three CRD definitions, enabling choice between polling vs. watching for feedback signals.
Go Type Definitions
work/v1/types.go
Adds new FeedbackScrapeType string type with constants FeedbackPollType and FeedbackWatchType; extends ManifestConfigOption struct with optional FeedbackScrapeType field and kubebuilder validation annotations.

Estimated code review effort

🎯 2 (Simple) | ⏱️ ~12 minutes

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 2 | ❌ 1
❌ Failed checks (1 warning)
Check name Status Explanation Resolution
Description check ⚠️ Warning The pull request description is essentially empty, containing only the default template structure with no substantive content in the Summary or Related issue sections. Add a detailed summary explaining what feedbackScrapeType does, why it was added, and which resources are affected. Link any related issues using 'Fixes #' or 'Relates to #' format.
✅ Passed checks (2 passed)
Check name Status Explanation
Title check ✅ Passed The title clearly identifies the main change: adding a feedbackScrapeType field across multiple CRD schemas and type definitions.
Docstring Coverage ✅ Passed No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check.

✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings.

✨ Finishing touches
  • 📝 Generate docstrings

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.

Copy link

@youngbupark youngbupark left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Jan 21, 2026

@youngbupark: changing LGTM is restricted to collaborators

Details

In response to this:

LGTM

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.

Copy link
Contributor

@annelaucg annelaucg left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Jan 21, 2026

@annelaucg: changing LGTM is restricted to collaborators

Details

In response to this:

LGTM

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.

@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Jan 21, 2026

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: annelaucg, qiujian16, youngbupark

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

@elgnay
Copy link
Contributor

elgnay commented Jan 22, 2026

/lgtm

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

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants