Skip to content

k8s 1.28 version update and go 1.20 #292

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
Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jan 9, 2024
Merged

k8s 1.28 version update and go 1.20 #292

merged 1 commit into from
Jan 9, 2024

Conversation

@acornett21
Copy link
Contributor

@acornett21 acornett21 commented Aug 30, 2023 •
edited
Loading

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot requested review from anik120 and perdasilva August 30, 2023 21:24
@acornett21 acornett21 force-pushed the k8s_1_28 branch 2 times, most recently from 0e29d19 to 413ebc5 Compare August 30, 2023 21:31
@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Aug 30, 2023 •
edited
Loading

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Comparison is base (ff0fe0e) 42.64% compared to head (a455cd7) 41.99%.

❗ Current head a455cd7 differs from pull request most recent head c47686a. Consider uploading reports for the commit c47686a to get more accurate results

Additional details and impacted files 
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master     #292      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   42.64%   41.99%   -0.65%     
==========================================
  Files          42       39       -3     
  Lines        3583     3512      -71     
==========================================
- Hits         1528     1475      -53     
+ Misses       1903     1891      -12     
+ Partials      152      146       -6

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@acornett21 acornett21 force-pushed the k8s_1_28 branch 2 times, most recently from 51aeb08 to b994201 Compare August 30, 2023 21:46
bcrochet
bcrochet approved these changes Sep 13, 2023
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@bcrochet bcrochet left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

/lgtm

@openshift-ci
Copy link

openshift-ci bot commented Sep 13, 2023

@bcrochet: changing LGTM is restricted to collaborators

In response to this:

/lgtm

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.

perdasilva
perdasilva previously approved these changes Sep 19, 2023
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@perdasilva perdasilva left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

lgtm

@perdasilva
Copy link
Contributor

/lgtm

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Sep 21, 2023
@perdasilva
Copy link
Contributor

/hold to make sure we don't need to merge anything before bumping the kube version

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. label Sep 21, 2023
@perdasilva perdasilva mentioned this pull request Sep 21, 2023
Closed
@openshift-merge-robot openshift-merge-robot added the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Oct 14, 2023
@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot removed the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Oct 17, 2023
@openshift-merge-robot openshift-merge-robot removed the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Oct 17, 2023
@openshift-merge-robot openshift-merge-robot added the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Oct 25, 2023
@openshift-merge-robot openshift-merge-robot removed the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Oct 30, 2023
@openshift-merge-robot openshift-merge-robot added the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Nov 18, 2023
@openshift-merge-robot openshift-merge-robot removed the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Nov 20, 2023
@openshift-merge-robot openshift-merge-robot added the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Nov 30, 2023
@openshift-merge-robot openshift-merge-robot removed the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Dec 4, 2023
@Neo2308
Copy link
Contributor

Neo2308 commented Dec 30, 2023

@perdasilva is this ready to merge now?
This is blocking progress on operator-framework/operator-sdk#6554

@Neo2308
Copy link
Contributor

Neo2308 commented Jan 7, 2024

@everettraven could you take a look at this PR?

@acornett21
Copy link
Contributor Author

@joelanford @kevinrizza Would it be possible to get someone to review this PR? Thanks.

everettraven
everettraven approved these changes Jan 8, 2024
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@everettraven everettraven left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

/lgtm

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Jan 8, 2024
joelanford
joelanford approved these changes Jan 8, 2024
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@joelanford joelanford left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

/approve

@openshift-ci
Copy link

openshift-ci bot commented Jan 8, 2024

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: acornett21, joelanford

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 /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Jan 8, 2024
@Neo2308
Copy link
Contributor

Neo2308 commented Jan 9, 2024

/unhold

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot removed the do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. label Jan 9, 2024
@openshift-merge-bot openshift-merge-bot bot merged commit 9ffba44 into operator-framework:master Jan 9, 2024
@joelanford
Copy link
Member

Oops. It looks like this PR reverted parts of #309.

I'll make a new PR to bump otelhttp again.

@joelanford joelanford mentioned this pull request Jan 10, 2024
Merged
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@joelanford joelanford joelanford approved these changes

@everettraven everettraven everettraven approved these changes

@perdasilva perdasilva perdasilva left review comments

@anik120 anik120 Awaiting requested review from anik120

+1 more reviewer

@bcrochet bcrochet bcrochet approved these changes

Reviewers whose approvals may not affect merge requirements

Assignees

@perdasilva perdasilva

@everettraven everettraven

Labels

approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged.

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

7 participants

@acornett21 @perdasilva @Neo2308 @joelanford @bcrochet @everettraven @openshift-merge-robot