-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 40k
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
feat: cleanup feature gates for CSIPersistentVolume #79309
feat: cleanup feature gates for CSIPersistentVolume #79309
Conversation
/priority important-soon |
/assign @vladimirvivien @lavalamp |
d56a7ec
to
fc63859
Compare
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.
/lgtm
Modulo the Bazel changes. Ensure if those are flake or if we need to run an update script.
/test pull-kubernetes-bazel-test
the RBAC test fixture data needs to be regenerated, see the unit test failure output for instructions on how to do that |
fc63859
to
ad392e3
Compare
/retest
…On Jun 24, 2019, 10:58 AM +0800, Kubernetes Prow Robot ***@***.***>, wrote:
@draveness: The following tests failed, say /retest to rerun them all:
Test name
Commit
Details
Rerun command
pull-kubernetes-kubemark-e2e-gce-big
fc63859
link
/test pull-kubernetes-kubemark-e2e-gce-big
pull-kubernetes-e2e-gce
ad392e3
link
/test pull-kubernetes-e2e-gce
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.
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or mute the thread.
|
/retest
…On Jun 24, 2019, 11:34 AM +0800, Kubernetes Prow Robot ***@***.***>, wrote:
@draveness: The following test failed, say /retest to rerun them all:
Test name
Commit
Details
Rerun command
pull-kubernetes-e2e-gce
ad392e3
link
/test pull-kubernetes-e2e-gce
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.
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or mute the thread.
|
Thanks Jordan, the comments have been addressed, please take another look. |
ad392e3
to
b470b08
Compare
b470b08
to
8e9472b
Compare
/retest |
/retest
Regards,
Draven
…On Jun 25, 2019, 10:25 AM +0800, Kubernetes Prow Robot ***@***.***>, wrote:
@draveness: The following tests failed, say /retest to rerun them all:
Test name
Commit
Details
Rerun command
pull-kubernetes-e2e-gce-100-performance
8e9472b
link
/test pull-kubernetes-e2e-gce-100-performance
pull-kubernetes-e2e-gce
8e9472b
link
/test pull-kubernetes-e2e-gce
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.
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or mute the thread.
|
/lgtm |
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: draveness, liggitt The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. The pull request process is described here
Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
/kind cleanup
What this PR does / why we need it:
CSIPersistentVolume has already graduated to GA two releases ago, we could remove it in release 1.16
Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
Fix: #79308
Special notes for your reviewer:
Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?: