Skip to content
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.

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

Refactor haproxy router config manager blueprint validation code. #10

Merged

Conversation

ramr
Copy link
Contributor

@ramr ramr commented Feb 5, 2019

Follow up to refactor the blueprint validation code.

Migrated from: openshift/origin#20722

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the size/S Denotes a PR that changes 10-29 lines, ignoring generated files. label Feb 5, 2019
@Miciah
Copy link
Contributor

Miciah commented Feb 5, 2019

What's up with the return value of AddBlueprint? Was that change supposed to be in this PR? Should (p *BlueprintPlugin) HandleRoute be changed to handle the error return?

@openshift-merge-robot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest

1 similar comment
@openshift-merge-robot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest

@ramr
Copy link
Contributor Author

ramr commented Feb 7, 2019

What's up with the return value of AddBlueprint? Was that change supposed to be in this PR?
Should (p *BlueprintPlugin) HandleRoute be changed to handle the error return?

Missed that - good catch. Yeah, HandleRoute should propogate that error up. So the old pr went thru' some iterations where it was generating events in here and then we dropped that, so the error handling needed to propogate errors back (on blueprint add).

@ramr ramr force-pushed the blueprint-extval-followup branch from 44254c5 to 52dec3e Compare February 7, 2019 06:33
@Miciah
Copy link
Contributor

Miciah commented Feb 7, 2019

With (p *BlueprintPlugin) HandleRoute propagating the error from AddBlueprint, (c *RouterController) processRoute will log it, right? Do we still need the glog.Errorf in AddBlueprint?

@ramr
Copy link
Contributor Author

ramr commented Feb 8, 2019

With (p *BlueprintPlugin) HandleRoute propagating the error from AddBlueprint, (c *RouterController) processRoute will log it, right? Do we still need the glog.Errorf in AddBlueprint?

I think it should - will check that next week and if so, remove it. Thx

@ramr ramr force-pushed the blueprint-extval-followup branch from 52dec3e to e5bdce6 Compare February 11, 2019 23:41
@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files. and removed size/S Denotes a PR that changes 10-29 lines, ignoring generated files. labels Feb 11, 2019
@Miciah
Copy link
Contributor

Miciah commented Feb 12, 2019

/lgtm

@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

@Miciah: changing LGTM is restricted to assignees, and only openshift/router repo collaborators may be assigned issues.

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.

@ramr
Copy link
Contributor Author

ramr commented Feb 14, 2019

/retest

@ramr
Copy link
Contributor Author

ramr commented Feb 26, 2019

@ironcladlou PTAL needs approval. Thx

@ironcladlou
Copy link
Contributor

/approve

@ironcladlou
Copy link
Contributor

/lgtm

@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

@ironcladlou: changing LGTM is restricted to assignees, and only openshift/router repo collaborators may be assigned issues.

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.

@knobunc
Copy link
Contributor

knobunc commented Feb 27, 2019

@smarterclayton Do you know why this PR hates @Miciah and @ironcladlou?

/lgtm

@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

@knobunc: changing LGTM is restricted to assignees, and only openshift/router repo collaborators may be assigned issues.

In response to this:

@smarterclayton Do you know why this PR hates @Miciah and @ironcladlou?

/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.

@pweil- pweil- self-assigned this Feb 27, 2019
@pweil-
Copy link

pweil- commented Feb 27, 2019

/lgtm
/approve

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Feb 27, 2019
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: ironcladlou, knobunc, Miciah, pweil-, ramr

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-robot openshift-ci-robot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Feb 27, 2019
@ramr
Copy link
Contributor Author

ramr commented Feb 27, 2019

/retest

error was: level=fatal msg="failed to fetch Terraform Variables: failed to fetch dependency of \"Terraform Variables\": failed to fetch dependency of \"Cluster ID\": failed to fetch dependency of \"Install Config\": failed to fetch dependency of \"Base Domain\": failed to generate asset \"Platform\": EOF" �[0G�[2K�[1;92m? �[1;99mPlatform [Use arrows to move, type to filter]

@ramr
Copy link
Contributor Author

ramr commented Mar 1, 2019

/retest

@openshift-merge-robot openshift-merge-robot merged commit 80b8c3d into openshift:master Mar 1, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
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. size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

7 participants