RHDEVDOCS-6317: Post GA changes for GitOps 1.16 #91491
Conversation
openshift-ci
bot
added
the
size/S
Dhruv-Soni11
force-pushed
the
RHDEVDOCS-6317
branch
from
1fe209e to
2314de8
Compare
Dhruv-Soni11
changed the title
openshift-ci-robot
added
the
jira/valid-reference
|
@Dhruv-Soni11: This pull request references RHDEVDOCS-6317 which is a valid jira issue. In response to this:
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 openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository. |
|
@Dhruv-Soni11: This pull request references RHDEVDOCS-6317 which is a valid jira issue. In response to this:
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 openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository. |
|
/label peer-review-needed |
openshift-ci
bot
added
the
peer-review-needed
|
/label peer-review-needed |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Please note that updates to release notes outside of a major, minor, or patch release requires change management. Consult with your DPM or content strategist to see if this PR qualifies for an "announcement" change management email to stakeholders. Please refer to the OpenShift Docs Manual or reach out on Slack if you have questions about the CM process.
Otherwise, just a small style issue regarding API object formatting.
/label peer-review-done
/remove-label peer-review-needed
/remove-label peer-review-in-progress
openshift-ci
bot
added
peer-review-done
|
@michaelryanpeter: Those labels are not set on the issue: In response to this:
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. |
Dhruv-Soni11
changed the title
|
@Dhruv-Soni11: This pull request references RHDEVDOCS-6317 which is a valid jira issue. In response to this:
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 openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository. |
Thanks for the suggestion @michaelryanpeter. I have sent a Change Management email to the required stakeholders as per the process. Once I get their acks, I will send it for the merge review round. |
Dhruv-Soni11
force-pushed
the
RHDEVDOCS-6317
branch
from
c72d380 to
7dc05c3
Compare
|
@Dhruv-Soni11: all tests passed! Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard. 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 understand the commands that are listed here. |
|
@Dhruv-Soni11: This pull request references RHDEVDOCS-6317 which is a valid jira issue. In response to this:
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 openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository. |
|
CS Ack. I think change management is required primarily cause we added this: https://github.com/openshift/openshift-docs/pull/91491/files#diff-a86d57b5759e9b51c7809d425db698aa2e9aec3115aaadb163c554e6f8121265R103. |
|
/lgtm |
Yes @Preeticp, that is the reason I have initiated this change management request. Thanks for the acknowledgement. |
| === Deprecation of `.spec.initialRepositories` & `.spec.repositoryCredentials` fields in Argo CD | ||
|
|
||
| * In {gitops-title} v1.16, the `.spec.initialRepositories` and `.spec.repositoryCredentials` fields in Argo CD are deprecated and will be removed in a future release. Update your configurations to remove dependencies on these fields, as they will no longer be supported. To add or modify a repository, use the Argo CD web UI or CLI. link:https://issues.redhat.com/browse/GITOPS-5961[GITOPS-5961] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
As written, this sentence is incorrect (fields will not be removed, and .spec fields are directly not part of Argo CD). This is a corrected version (@anandrkskd can correct me if wrong):
- In {gitops-title} v1.16, the
.spec.initialRepositoriesand.spec.repositoryCredentialsfields in theArgoCDCR are deprecatedand will be removed in a future release. These fields will no longer be supported by {gitops-title} and Argo CD in a future release. Update your configurations to remove dependencies on these fieldsas they will no longer be supported. To add or modify a repository, use the Argo CD web UI or CLI. link:https://issues.redhat.com/browse/GITOPS-5961[GITOPS-5961]
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If I understand correctly, we want to remove .spec.initialRepositories and .spec.repositoryCredentials field from ArogCD CR in upcoming 1.17 release, as per the discussion happened in last cabal call.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@jgwest, please let me know what do you think?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Both sentences make sense to me. In 1.17, even if we don't remove the fields, we will drop the functionality as upstream doesn't support it and eventually remove these fields whenever we do a API version upgrade of the ArgoCD CR in future.
What do you think about?
In {gitops-title} v1.16, the
.spec.initialRepositoriesand.spec.repositoryCredentialsfields in theArgoCDCR are deprecated and will be removed in a future release. These fields will no longer be supported by {gitops-title} in a future release. Update your configurations to remove dependencies on these fields. To add or modify a repository, use the Argo CD web UI or CLI. link:https://issues.redhat.com/browse/GITOPS-5961[GITOPS-5961]
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Wouldn't it be more confusing for users to have fields but not working?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think it is an accepted practice to keep deprecated fields around without functionality. With proper documentation/ k8s events, we can avoid confusion.
The recommended approach is to remove fields only when performing a CRD API upgrade.
|
LGTM - DPM |
Version(s):
GitOps 1.16
Issue:
https://issues.redhat.com/browse/RHDEVDOCS-6317
Link to docs preview:
Incorrectly rendering attribute in the Enable the creation of aggregated cluster roles section
Deprecated and removed features in GitOps 1.16 Release Notes
Note under the About RedHat OpenShift GitOps section
QE review:
Change management:
Need an ACK from Eng: [email protected] @svghadi
Need an ACK from PM: @harrietgrace
Need an ACK from Product Release Lead: @anand Francis
Need an ACK from QE: @varshab1210
Need an ACK from DPM: [email protected]
Need an ACK from CS: @Preeticp
Need an ACK from Peer reviewer: @michaelryanpeter
Need an ACK from Merge reviewer:
Additional information: