Skip to content
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

Change Expose Command's port operation to be not required #13783

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Sep 13, 2015
Merged

Change Expose Command's port operation to be not required #13783

merged 1 commit into from
Sep 13, 2015

Conversation

feihujiang
Copy link
Contributor

Fixes #13782

@feihujiang feihujiang changed the title Change Expose Command's port operation to no required Change Expose Command's port operation to be not required Sep 10, 2015
@k8s-bot
Copy link

k8s-bot commented Sep 10, 2015

GCE e2e build/test failed for commit 07ce6c0b5ffba192b120d798b60c9b617d3304ec.

@janetkuo
Copy link
Member

@k8s-bot test this please

@k8s-bot
Copy link

k8s-bot commented Sep 10, 2015

GCE e2e build/test passed for commit 07ce6c0b5ffba192b120d798b60c9b617d3304ec.

@k8s-bot
Copy link

k8s-bot commented Sep 10, 2015

GCE e2e build/test passed for commit 07ce6c0b5ffba192b120d798b60c9b617d3304ec.

@janetkuo
Copy link
Member

Code looks good; needs a rebase

@feihujiang feihujiang force-pushed the changeExposePortOperationToNoRequired branch from 07ce6c0 to 714a042 Compare September 11, 2015 03:44
@feihujiang
Copy link
Contributor Author

@janetkuo I rebased, please review.

@k8s-bot
Copy link

k8s-bot commented Sep 11, 2015

GCE e2e build/test failed for commit 714a042.

@feihujiang
Copy link
Contributor Author

@k8s-bot test this please

@k8s-bot
Copy link

k8s-bot commented Sep 11, 2015

GCE e2e build/test failed for commit 714a042.

@feihujiang
Copy link
Contributor Author

@k8s-bot test this again please

@k8s-bot
Copy link

k8s-bot commented Sep 11, 2015

GCE e2e build/test passed for commit 714a042.

@janetkuo janetkuo added the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Sep 11, 2015
@k8s-github-robot
Copy link

The author of this PR is not in the whitelist for merge, can one of the admins add the 'ok-to-merge' label?

@k8s-github-robot
Copy link

Continuous integration appears to have missed, closing and re-opening to trigger it

@k8s-github-robot k8s-github-robot added the size/XS Denotes a PR that changes 0-9 lines, ignoring generated files. label Sep 13, 2015
@k8s-github-robot
Copy link

Labelling this PR as size/XS

@k8s-github-robot
Copy link

@k8s-bot test this [submit-queue is verifying that this PR is safe to merge]

@k8s-bot
Copy link

k8s-bot commented Sep 13, 2015

GCE e2e build/test passed for commit 714a042.

@k8s-github-robot
Copy link

Automatic merge from SubmitQueue

k8s-github-robot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 13, 2015
Merge pull request #13783 from feihujiang/changeExposePortOperationTo…
96df310 
…NoRequired

Auto commit by PR queue bot
@k8s-github-robot k8s-github-robot merged commit 96df310 into kubernetes:master Sep 13, 2015
@feihujiang feihujiang deleted the changeExposePortOperationToNoRequired branch September 17, 2015 02:58
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers
No reviews
Assignees

@janetkuo janetkuo

Labels
lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. size/XS Denotes a PR that changes 0-9 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
5 participants
@feihujiang @k8s-bot @janetkuo @k8s-github-robot @googlebot