Bump kubernetes-client-bom from 6.13.4 to 7.0.1 #45259
Conversation
quarkus-bot
bot
added
area/dependencies
|
Marking as ready to start the test suites (some tests I can't seem to run locally) |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
manusa
force-pushed
the
feat/deps/kubernetes-client
branch
from
c45403c to
f6ef338
Compare
Signed-off-by: Marc Nuri <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Marc Nuri <[email protected]>
manusa
force-pushed
the
feat/deps/kubernetes-client
branch
from
f6ef338 to
ae02fe0
Compare
Signed-off-by: Marc Nuri <[email protected]>
manusa
force-pushed
the
feat/deps/kubernetes-client
branch
from
942ca28 to
1bec3cd
Compare
| @@ -26,7 +26,7 @@ public void checkEnvironment(Optional<SelectedKubernetesDeploymentTargetBuildIte | |||
| } | |||
| if (target.getEntry().getName().equals(OPENSHIFT)) { | |||
| try (var openShiftClient = kubernetesClientBuilder.buildClient().adapt(OpenShiftClient.class)) { | |||
| if (openShiftClient.isSupported()) { | |||
| if (openShiftClient.hasApiGroup("openshift.io", false)) { | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Shouldn't that be true here? Unless I'm missing something, OpenShift being supported should mean that the openshift.io group is available on the cluster, no? Seems like in the migration the condition got inverted…
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The second argument is not negating the method but specifying that the match has to be exact or not ( true exact match, false partial match).
In this case, the meaning is that if there is any API group that partially contains this string, then we consider it to have the API group.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Was wondering when I started looking into this if we should keep these annotations and make then return a mock KubernetesServer instead to ease migration but I haven't looked too deep so maybe that wouldn't gain us much?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
That's something I've thought and even started to do (in the spirit of trying to minimize breakages).
The problem is that the OpenShiftMockServer class no longer exists, so the breakage will remain even if we modify t to inject a KubernetesMockServer.
Please, feel free to see if you can devise some way to minimize the breakages.
This is for now the most conflicting point, since I'm not sure what the Quarkus policy requires for removing a module such as this one.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Out of curiosity what's that class for?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ah, nevermind, just saw the associated commit that explains it :)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It removes the default io.fabric8.kubernetes.client.vertx.VertxHttpClientFactory
With the fix introduced in v7.0.1, this class causes problems in Graal since it instantiates a Vertx instance.
The class shouldn't be necessary in Quarkus since it uses its very own QuarkusHttpClientFactory.
Signed-off-by: Marc Nuri <[email protected]>
… QuarkusHttpClientFactory) Signed-off-by: Marc Nuri <[email protected]>
manusa
force-pushed
the
feat/deps/kubernetes-client
branch
from
1bec3cd to
08b7c5e
Compare
Status for workflow
|
|
Looks like things are working OK on QOSDK's side based on https://github.com/quarkiverse/quarkus-operator-sdk/actions/runs/12584459676/job/35074153045 |
Description
Superseded closes #42335
Fixes #44899
This PR is built on top of the changes provided by @metacosm in #42335.
The most notable change is the removal of the
quarkus-test-openshift-client.We'll need to document a migration path for those users who were relying on this module.