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.

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

Clarify supported version skew between masters, nodes, and clients #25087

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
May 9, 2016

Conversation

ikehz
Copy link
Contributor

@ikehz ikehz commented May 3, 2016

Per discussion on #22897.

cc @bgrant0607 @roberthbailey

@ikehz ikehz added kind/documentation Categorizes issue or PR as related to documentation. area/upgrade release-note Denotes a PR that will be considered when it comes time to generate release notes. labels May 3, 2016
@k8s-github-robot k8s-github-robot added kind/design Categorizes issue or PR as related to design. size/S Denotes a PR that changes 10-29 lines, ignoring generated files. labels May 3, 2016
possible.

Different components are expected to be compatible across different amounts of
skew: cluster components (master and node components) should work across two
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

"cluster components (master and node components) should work across two minor versions but should be at a version no newer than the master" is confusing because you are grouping the components together but then comparing them to each other. I think it would be clearer to root everything around the master version and then talk about compatibility / skew with that as a reference point.

@ikehz
Copy link
Contributor Author

ikehz commented May 3, 2016

@roberthbailey Good point; done.

@roberthbailey
Copy link
Contributor

LGTM, please squash. I'll wait for @bgrant0607 to review before adding the label.

@ikehz
Copy link
Contributor Author

ikehz commented May 5, 2016

Squashed; PTAL @bgrant0607.

@bgrant0607
Copy link
Member

@ihmccreery Please assign PRs to whomever you'd like to review them.

@bgrant0607
Copy link
Member

LGTM, thanks.

@bgrant0607 bgrant0607 added the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label May 9, 2016
@k8s-bot
Copy link

k8s-bot commented May 9, 2016

GCE e2e build/test passed for commit e618e33.

@k8s-github-robot
Copy link

Automatic merge from submit-queue

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
area/upgrade kind/design Categorizes issue or PR as related to design. kind/documentation Categorizes issue or PR as related to documentation. lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. release-note Denotes a PR that will be considered when it comes time to generate release notes. size/S Denotes a PR that changes 10-29 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

7 participants