-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 40.1k
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
Modify confusing deprecation comment for generic top level prefix proxy. #55049
Conversation
e112360
to
a72a42a
Compare
a72a42a
to
b8222fb
Compare
/lgtm |
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: enj, xiangpengzhao Assign the PR to them by writing No associated issue. Update pull-request body to add a reference to an issue, or get approval with The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.
Needs approval from an approver in each of these OWNERS Files:
You can indicate your approval by writing |
/assign @deads2k |
@@ -427,10 +427,8 @@ func (a *APIInstaller) registerResourceHandlers(path string, storage rest.Storag | |||
actions = appendIf(actions, action{"DELETE", itemPath, nameParams, namer, false}, isDeleter) | |||
actions = appendIf(actions, action{"WATCH", "watch/" + itemPath, nameParams, namer, false}, isWatcher) | |||
// We add "proxy" subresource to remove the need for the generic top level prefix proxy. | |||
// The generic top level prefix proxy is deprecated in v1.2, and will be removed in 1.3, or 1.4 at the latest. | |||
// TODO: DEPRECATED in v1.2. | |||
// The generic top level prefix proxy is deprecated in v1.2, and should be removed in v2 API. |
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.
This updated comment isn't correct. The original is correct. The top level proxy should be removed
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 once tried to remove it but some tests failed. Seems like something still depends on it. I will reproduce it.
/lgtm cancel //PR changed after LGTM, removing LGTM. @deads2k @enj @timothysc @xiangpengzhao |
@deads2k I found some discussions : #30259 (comment) /cc @nikhiljindal |
@xiangpengzhao: 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. 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. I understand the commands that are listed here. |
This PR hasn't been active in 30 days. It will be closed in 59 days (Feb 8, 2018). cc @deads2k @enj @xiangpengzhao You can add 'keep-open' label to prevent this from happening, or add a comment to keep it open another 90 days |
kindly ping @nikhiljindal for confirmation :) |
/close |
What this PR does / why we need it:
The current comment is confusing.
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: