replace gcr.io/gke-release-staging to use k8s.gcr.io/cloud-provider-gcp #836
There are no files selected for viewing
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
|
|
@@ -31,8 +31,8 @@ metadata: | |
| name: imagetag-csi-gce-driver-prow-rc | ||
| imageTag: | ||
| name: gke.gcr.io/gcp-compute-persistent-disk-csi-driver | ||
| newName: k8s.gcr.io/cloud-provider-gcp/gcp-compute-persistent-disk-csi-driver | ||
| newTag: "v1.2.2" | ||
|
Comment on lines
-34
to
+35
There was a problem hiding this comment. Based on naming scheme I wasn't sure if these needed to correspond to versions listed in kubernetes/kubernetes. But all I could find were testing manifests that listed a much older version, e.g. https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/blob/release-1.19/test/e2e/testing-manifests/storage-csi/gce-pd/node_ds.yaml#L43 So I'm assuming this is fine There was a problem hiding this comment. These versions match what we're shipping with the managed driver in GKE, so it's probably good to keep them as you've written, ie this is fine. The manifests in k/k are way out of date. The intent is to test that k/k hasn't broken the CSI interface rather than testing latest versions of PD CSI IIUC. It's not clear to me that the work on putting the PD CSI driver in cloud-provider-gcp is going to mean we should remove the testing manifests from k/k or not? There was a problem hiding this comment. yes as part of that effort we'll remove the manifests from k/k |
||
| --- | ||
|
|
||
| apiVersion: builtin | ||
|
|
||
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.
Should we also change
nameand its source?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.
That would require changing the integration test code which I'd like to do in its own PR so it doesn't get buried---that sort of thing has had knock-on effects with random test pipelines breaking.
Since we are replacing the image in all overlays probably we should take advantage of doing that to change the placeholder name to something that is clearly a placeholder, which might reduce problems in the future.