feat: Upgrade to k8s v1.27.2; controller-runtime v0.15.0; add VAP prototype #2819
Conversation
maxsmythe
force-pushed
the
gk-preliminary-vap
branch
from
f888ac6
to
d441e15
Compare
maxsmythe
changed the title
maxsmythe
force-pushed
the
gk-preliminary-vap
branch
2 times, most recently
from
77f5227
to
8c36082
Compare
Signed-off-by: Max Smythe <smythe@google.com>
maxsmythe
force-pushed
the
gk-preliminary-vap
branch
from
8c36082
to
96499fa
Compare
Codecov ReportPatch coverage:
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #2819 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 53.52% 53.54% +0.01%
==========================================
Files 132 133 +1
Lines 11551 11536 -15
==========================================
- Hits 6183 6177 -6
+ Misses 4887 4883 -4
+ Partials 481 476 -5
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.
☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
Signed-off-by: Max Smythe <smythe@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Max Smythe <smythe@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Max Smythe <smythe@google.com>
maxsmythe
force-pushed
the
gk-preliminary-vap
branch
from
2bdbe20
to
7db6797
Compare
|
This moves us to K8s 1.27.2 and adds the VAP prototype. I tried to use submodules and subtrees, but submodules required us to have a controller-runtime fork we could push to (at which point we should just use gomod) and subtrees was incompatible with DCO. I wound up just copying controller-runtime at a specific commit. LMK if you want me to do something different. Note that gomod's |
.gitmodules
Outdated
| @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ | |||
| [submodule "third_party/sigs.k8s.io/controller-runtime"] | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
as chatted offline, probably don't need this now.
Signed-off-by: Max Smythe <smythe@google.com>
cmd/gator/test/test.go
Outdated
| @@ -72,6 +73,7 @@ func init() { | |||
| Cmd.Flags().StringVarP(&flagOutput, flagNameOutput, "o", "", fmt.Sprintf("Output format. One of: %s|%s.", stringJSON, stringYAML)) | |||
| Cmd.Flags().BoolVarP(&flagIncludeTrace, "trace", "t", false, "include a trace for the underlying Constraint Framework evaluation.") | |||
| Cmd.Flags().BoolVarP(&flagGatherStats, "stats", "", false, "include performance stats returned from the Constraint Framework.") | |||
| Cmd.Flags().BoolVarP(&flagEnableK8sCel, "prototype-enable-k8s-native-validation", "", false, "PROTOTYPE (not stable): enable the validating admission policy driver") | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
nit: we used experimental before, do we want to use the same convention or do we think this is pre-experimental?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm okay with either name.
Right now, the format for the engine hasn't really had any scrutiny (I mostly followed VAP schema). My main concern is that users know:
- This isn't stable
- This is intended to be the start of a discussion, not necessarily something we want to build from
Signed-off-by: Max Smythe <smythe@google.com>
What this PR does / why we need it:
This PR upgrades the underlying K8s libraries to 1.27.2 and adds support for a prototype validating admission policy driver.
Which issue(s) this PR fixes (optional, using
fixes #<issue number>(, fixes #<issue_number>, ...)format, will close the issue(s) when the PR gets merged):Fixes #
Special notes for your reviewer: