-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 38.7k
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
remove GAed KubeletCredentialProviders (1.28) #116901
remove GAed KubeletCredentialProviders (1.28) #116901
Conversation
Please note that we're already in Test Freeze for the Fast forwards are scheduled to happen every 6 hours, whereas the most recent run was: Thu Mar 23 22:22:11 UTC 2023. |
@@ -30,7 +30,7 @@ import ( | |||
admissionapi "k8s.io/pod-security-admission/api" | |||
) | |||
|
|||
var _ = SIGDescribe("ImageCredentialProvider [Feature:KubeletCredentialProviders]", func() { |
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.
The fg is GAed in v1.26. Should we remove the feature tag in e2e node test? But there are some test ci for this and we should not change it now in my mind.
- I opened remove KubeletCredentialProviders=true as it will be removed test-infra#29126 to cleanup the feature gate usage only.
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.
Is this expected to work in all clusters? Feature also implies tests that are not portable. This test is known to be problematic for other reasons but I'm not sure re: portability
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.
#117527 will add the feature tag back.
Sorry for the mistake.
cf5a20e
to
f9a5502
Compare
/retest |
/triage accepted |
I think we can remove those test that focus on KubeletCredentialProviders as this is GAed. I removed the |
@pacoxu: The following test 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. |
I removed it in kubernetes/test-infra#29454 |
/skip |
/lgtm |
LGTM label has been added. Git tree hash: 55f46476aa3b83b67a4742b77fe2f19a9722018d
|
Since k8s 1.28, this feature gate has been removed. kubernetes/kubernetes#116901 Signed-off-by: Zhecheng Li <[email protected]>
…1.28, this feature gate has been removed. kubernetes/kubernetes#116901 Signed-off-by: Zhecheng Li <[email protected]>
…1.28, this feature gate has been removed. kubernetes/kubernetes#116901 Signed-off-by: Zhecheng Li <[email protected]>
…1.28, this feature gate has been removed. kubernetes/kubernetes#116901 Signed-off-by: Zhecheng Li <[email protected]>
…1.28, this feature gate has been removed. kubernetes/kubernetes#116901 Signed-off-by: Zhecheng Li <[email protected]>
/kind cleanup
Fixes kubernetes/enhancements#2133
Special notes for your reviewer:
Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?