kubernetes-sigs
Conformance: resources not referencing a `GatwayClass` managed by the implementation should not be reconciled
What would you like to be added:
This issue is created out of this discussion.
We should add a conformance test that:
- create a fake
GatewayClass(having a fakeControllerName) - create a
Gatewayreferencing the GWC above - create an
HTTPRoutereferencing theGatewayabove as a parent. - the
GatewayClass, theGateway, and theHTTPRoutemust not be reconciled by the implementation, and their status must be left untouched.
Why this is needed:
This is needed because we must ensure that for a route to be reconciled, the root of the chain of objects, the GatewayClass, must belong to the implementation.
The Kubernetes project currently lacks enough contributors to adequately respond to all issues.
This bot triages un-triaged issues according to the following rules:
- After 90d of inactivity,
lifecycle/staleis applied - After 30d of inactivity since
lifecycle/stalewas applied,lifecycle/rottenis applied - After 30d of inactivity since
lifecycle/rottenwas applied, the issue is closed
You can:
- Mark this issue as fresh with
/remove-lifecycle stale - Close this issue with
/close - Offer to help out with Issue Triage
Please send feedback to sig-contributor-experience at kubernetes/community.
/lifecycle stale
The Kubernetes project currently lacks enough contributors to adequately respond to all issues.
This bot triages un-triaged issues according to the following rules:
- After 90d of inactivity,
lifecycle/staleis applied - After 30d of inactivity since
lifecycle/stalewas applied,lifecycle/rottenis applied - After 30d of inactivity since
lifecycle/rottenwas applied, the issue is closed
You can:
- Mark this issue as fresh with
/remove-lifecycle stale - Close this issue with
/close - Offer to help out with Issue Triage
Please send feedback to sig-contributor-experience at kubernetes/community.
/lifecycle stale
worth adding a similar issue for e.g. an HTTPRoute that has a parent ref that means it should not be reconciled as it references a Gateway not under the implementation's GatewayClass (or parentrefs are empty etc.)
The Kubernetes project currently lacks enough active contributors to adequately respond to all issues.
This bot triages un-triaged issues according to the following rules:
- After 90d of inactivity,
lifecycle/staleis applied - After 30d of inactivity since
lifecycle/stalewas applied,lifecycle/rottenis applied - After 30d of inactivity since
lifecycle/rottenwas applied, the issue is closed
You can:
- Mark this issue as fresh with
/remove-lifecycle rotten - Close this issue with
/close - Offer to help out with Issue Triage
Please send feedback to sig-contributor-experience at kubernetes/community.
/lifecycle rotten
The Kubernetes project currently lacks enough active contributors to adequately respond to all issues and PRs.
This bot triages issues according to the following rules:
- After 90d of inactivity,
lifecycle/staleis applied - After 30d of inactivity since
lifecycle/stalewas applied,lifecycle/rottenis applied - After 30d of inactivity since
lifecycle/rottenwas applied, the issue is closed
You can:
- Reopen this issue with
/reopen - Mark this issue as fresh with
/remove-lifecycle rotten - Offer to help out with Issue Triage
Please send feedback to sig-contributor-experience at kubernetes/community.
/close not-planned
@k8s-triage-robot: Closing this issue, marking it as "Not Planned".
In response to this:
The Kubernetes project currently lacks enough active contributors to adequately respond to all issues and PRs.
This bot triages issues according to the following rules:
- After 90d of inactivity,
lifecycle/staleis applied- After 30d of inactivity since
lifecycle/stalewas applied,lifecycle/rottenis applied- After 30d of inactivity since
lifecycle/rottenwas applied, the issue is closedYou can:
- Reopen this issue with
/reopen- Mark this issue as fresh with
/remove-lifecycle rotten- Offer to help out with Issue Triage
Please send feedback to sig-contributor-experience at kubernetes/community.
/close not-planned
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-sigs/prow repository.
@mlavacca: Reopened this issue.
In response to this:
This is still relevant.
/reopen
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-sigs/prow repository.
I've had a chat with @Devaansh-Kumar and he is willing to pick up this issue. Changing the assignee accordingly.
/unassign /assign @Devaansh-Kumar
@mlavacca: GitHub didn't allow me to assign the following users: Devaansh-Kumar.
Note that only kubernetes-sigs members with read permissions, repo collaborators and people who have commented on this issue/PR can be assigned. Additionally, issues/PRs can only have 10 assignees at the same time. For more information please see the contributor guide
In response to this:
I've had a chat with @Devaansh-Kumar and he is willing to pick up this issue, changing the assignee accordingly.
/unassign /assign @Devaansh-Kumar
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-sigs/prow repository.
This issue has not been updated in over 1 year, and should be re-triaged.
You can:
- Confirm that this issue is still relevant with
/triage accepted(org members only) - Close this issue with
/close
For more details on the triage process, see https://www.kubernetes.dev/docs/guide/issue-triage/
/remove-triage accepted