Manifest kubernetes infra images by mkumatag · Pull Request #59664 · kubernetes/kubernetes

mkumatag · 2018-02-09T17:21:55Z

What this PR does / why we need it:
This PR is for creating manifest for the kubernetes infra images
Which issue(s) this PR fixes (optional, in fixes #<issue number>(, fixes #<issue_number>, ...) format, will close the issue(s) when PR gets merged):
Fixes #

Special notes for your reviewer:

Release note:

NONE

mkumatag · 2018-02-09T17:22:37Z

/cc @luxas @ixdy

mkumatag · 2018-02-16T13:53:12Z

/test pull-kubernetes-cross

mkumatag · 2018-02-21T18:01:29Z

ping @ixdy @luxas

ixdy · 2018-02-23T06:26:34Z

/cc @rvkubiak

k8s-ci-robot · 2018-02-23T06:26:35Z

@ixdy: GitHub didn't allow me to request PR reviews from the following users: rvkubiak.

Note that only kubernetes members and repo collaborators can review this PR, and authors cannot review their own PRs.

Details

In response to this:

/cc @rvkubiak

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.

mkumatag · 2018-04-06T08:07:49Z

@ixdy @luxas can you please review this code?

dims · 2018-06-11T10:48:45Z

cluster/images/etcd/Makefile

I was not expecting the version change here. Is there a reason we are doing that?

lot of changes went in the latest etcd makefile, lemme rebase first.

mkumatag · 2018-06-17T06:09:57Z

/test all

mkumatag · 2018-06-17T10:24:43Z

/test all

dims · 2018-06-19T10:50:38Z

/retest

dims · 2018-06-19T11:14:17Z

/test pull-kubernetes-kubemark-e2e-gce-big

spiffxp · 2018-08-23T20:40:44Z

/retest
needs rebase

jpbetz · 2018-09-19T19:45:13Z

Yes 3.2.24 is new. I'm okay with overwriting it with another image that has the etcd 3.2.24 binary in it. That's safe.

The quick background is: We introduced <etcd-version>-<revision> earlier this year to enable us to rev the image independent from the (highest) etcd version in the image, but for backward compatibility, we'll been continuing to publish the <etcd-version> tags. I'd like to deprecate them, but that needs to be done carefully so that we don't break anything/anyone.

jpbetz · 2018-09-19T19:49:28Z

Just realized I didn't fully understand the manifest list replacement idea. I'm fine with kicking off the manifest use list with 3.2.24 since we just published it recently.

spiffxp · 2018-09-19T19:54:00Z

This LGTM as well but I don't have /approve rights for either of these dirs

jbeda · 2018-09-19T19:59:06Z

/approve

neolit123 · 2018-09-19T20:01:29Z

@dims
do you want me to send a PR similar to this one that removes the -0 suffix in certain places WRT to manifest list?
#68318

ixdy · 2018-09-19T20:01:48Z

/hold

ixdy · 2018-09-19T23:51:13Z

/hold cancel

I've pushed a commit to update the revision. PTAL?

ixdy · 2018-09-19T23:55:02Z

cluster/images/etcd/Makefile

+export DOCKER_CLI_EXPERIMENTAL := enabled
 # golang version should match the golang version from https://github.com/coreos/etcd/releases for the current ETCD_VERSION.
-GOLANG_VERSION?=1.8.7
+GOLANG_VERSION?=1.11


/hold

This looks wrong? https://github.com/etcd-io/etcd/blob/34fcabab55585b39835820278da4de65b3463358/CHANGELOG-3.2.md#v3224-2018-07-24

good catch, let's switch this back to 1.8.7 since that's the recommendation

/hold cancel

I pushed another commit reverting this

dims · 2018-09-20T00:23:23Z

w00t! thanks a ton @ixdy

mkumatag · 2018-09-20T01:44:52Z

Thanks @ixdy quick fix.. can someone give LGTM ?

dims · 2018-09-20T01:58:22Z

/test pull-kubernetes-local-e2e
/lgtm

k8s-ci-robot · 2018-09-20T01:58:29Z

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: dims, jbeda, mkumatag

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:

~~build/OWNERS~~ [jbeda]
~~cluster/OWNERS~~ [jbeda]

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

mkumatag · 2018-09-20T03:16:53Z

Thanks all... Did anyone push the images? @ixdy @jpbetz

ixdy · 2018-09-20T04:56:18Z

I don't think we want to push any new images, just run make push-manifest using the existing images. (I guess maybe we need to rebuild etcd though, since its a different tag.)

I can look into this Thursday PT.

ixdy · 2018-09-20T19:29:09Z

Manifests and new etcd images have been pushed to staging-k8s.gcr.io. I'm working on promoting to k8s.gcr.io now.

I believe only kubeadm would be affected by this, since it uses the unrevisioned tag (3.2.24).
We probably want a follow-up PR to update uses of 3.2.24-0 to 3.2.24-1 as well as to use the manifest list k8s.gcr.io/etcd rather than the arch-specific suffixed images.

k8s-ci-robot added 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. cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. labels Feb 9, 2018

k8s-ci-robot requested review from roberthbailey and zmerlynn February 9, 2018 17:22

k8s-ci-robot requested review from ixdy and luxas February 9, 2018 17:22

mkumatag mentioned this pull request Feb 9, 2018

Manifest list for kubernetes images #57869

Closed

11 tasks

roberthbailey removed their request for review February 9, 2018 23:07

k8s-github-robot added the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Feb 13, 2018

mkumatag force-pushed the manifest_infra branch from 7d02cd0 to b7c56d9 Compare February 16, 2018 12:21

k8s-ci-robot removed the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Feb 16, 2018

k8s-ci-robot added the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Feb 24, 2018

mkumatag force-pushed the manifest_infra branch from b7c56d9 to 92ffc88 Compare April 6, 2018 08:02

k8s-ci-robot removed the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Apr 6, 2018

k8s-ci-robot added the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Apr 14, 2018

dims reviewed Jun 11, 2018

View reviewed changes

mkumatag force-pushed the manifest_infra branch from 92ffc88 to 25a225e Compare June 13, 2018 14:45

k8s-ci-robot removed the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Jun 13, 2018

k8s-ci-robot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Sep 19, 2018

k8s-ci-robot added do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. and removed lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. labels Sep 19, 2018

Update etcd image revision

6f9dfe5

ixdy force-pushed the manifest_infra branch from 201a93f to 6f9dfe5 Compare September 19, 2018 23:50

k8s-ci-robot removed the do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. label Sep 19, 2018

ixdy reviewed Sep 19, 2018

View reviewed changes

k8s-ci-robot added the do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. label Sep 19, 2018

Continue using go1.8.7 in etcd image

76256cc

k8s-ci-robot removed the do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. label Sep 20, 2018

ixdy approved these changes Sep 20, 2018

View reviewed changes

k8s-ci-robot added the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Sep 20, 2018

k8s-ci-robot merged commit d1111a5 into kubernetes:master Sep 20, 2018

neolit123 mentioned this pull request Sep 20, 2018

Update kube-dns container images. #68430

Merged

This was referenced Sep 20, 2018

cluster/gce and test/: update etcd:3.2.24-0 image to etcd:3.2.24-1 #68896

Merged

Remove etcd 3.2.18 from the etcd image #68898

Merged

Conversation

mkumatag commented Feb 9, 2018

Uh oh!

mkumatag commented Feb 9, 2018

Uh oh!

mkumatag commented Feb 16, 2018

Uh oh!

mkumatag commented Feb 21, 2018

Uh oh!

ixdy commented Feb 23, 2018

Uh oh!

k8s-ci-robot commented Feb 23, 2018

Uh oh!

mkumatag commented Apr 6, 2018

Uh oh!

dims Jun 11, 2018

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

mkumatag Jun 13, 2018

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

mkumatag commented Jun 17, 2018

Uh oh!

mkumatag commented Jun 17, 2018

Uh oh!

dims commented Jun 19, 2018

Uh oh!

dims commented Jun 19, 2018

Uh oh!

spiffxp commented Aug 23, 2018

Uh oh!

jpbetz commented Sep 19, 2018

Uh oh!

jpbetz commented Sep 19, 2018

Uh oh!

spiffxp commented Sep 19, 2018

Uh oh!

jbeda commented Sep 19, 2018

Uh oh!

neolit123 commented Sep 19, 2018

Uh oh!

ixdy commented Sep 19, 2018

Uh oh!

ixdy commented Sep 19, 2018

Uh oh!

ixdy Sep 19, 2018

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

dims Sep 19, 2018

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

ixdy Sep 20, 2018

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

dims commented Sep 20, 2018

Uh oh!

mkumatag commented Sep 20, 2018

Uh oh!

dims commented Sep 20, 2018

Uh oh!

k8s-ci-robot commented Sep 20, 2018

Uh oh!

mkumatag commented Sep 20, 2018

Uh oh!

ixdy commented Sep 20, 2018

Uh oh!

ixdy commented Sep 20, 2018

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

11 participants