Skip to content

NO-JIRA: Expand CAPI to Cluster API and MAPI to Machine API #272

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom
Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

NO-JIRA: Expand CAPI to Cluster API and MAPI to Machine API #272

wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

RadekManak
Copy link
Contributor

Expand CAPI to Cluster API and MAPI to Machine api in user facing strings.

This should cover all occurrences, as I have generated this using sed a manually filtered test strings that don't have to follow this convention.

@openshift-ci OpenShift CI
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Mar 14, 2025

Skipping CI for Draft Pull Request.
If you want CI signal for your change, please convert it to an actual PR.
You can still manually trigger a test run with /test all

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. label Mar 14, 2025
@RadekManak RadekManak marked this pull request as ready for review March 14, 2025 19:49
@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot removed the do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. label Mar 14, 2025
@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot requested review from JoelSpeed and nrb March 14, 2025 19:50
@RadekManak RadekManak changed the title Expand CAPI to Cluster API and MAPI to Machine api Expand CAPI to Cluster API and MAPI to Machine API Mar 14, 2025
@RadekManak RadekManak changed the title Expand CAPI to Cluster API and MAPI to Machine API NO-JIRA: Expand CAPI to Cluster API and MAPI to Machine API Mar 14, 2025
@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the jira/valid-reference Indicates that this PR references a valid Jira ticket of any type. label Mar 14, 2025
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link

@RadekManak: This pull request explicitly references no jira issue.

In response to this:

Expand CAPI to Cluster API and MAPI to Machine api in user facing strings.

This should cover all occurrences, as I have generated this using sed a manually filtered test strings that don't have to follow this convention.

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.

jeana-redhat
jeana-redhat approved these changes Mar 14, 2025
View reviewed changes
Copy link

@jeana-redhat jeana-redhat left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The expansion LGTM. There are other docs convention things that I would suggest changing, but I am guessing you'd prefer to keep commits sort of targeted to one topic.

I guess I can collect other things I notice and maybe open a PR myself later suggestions? In any case, this gives me a very good idea at what attempting something like that would look like.

@JoelSpeed
Copy link
Contributor

/approve
/assign @damdo

@openshift-ci OpenShift CI
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Mar 17, 2025

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: jeana-redhat, JoelSpeed

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 openshift-ci bot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Mar 17, 2025
@RadekManak
Copy link
Contributor Author

/retest

@theobarberbany
Copy link
Contributor

/lgtm

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Mar 17, 2025
@damdo
Copy link
Member

damdo commented Mar 17, 2025

/hold

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. label Mar 17, 2025
damdo
damdo suggested changes Mar 17, 2025
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@damdo damdo left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

A couple of places should not be changed.
The rest looks good.

/unlgtm

pkg/controllers/clusteroperator/clusteroperator_controller_test.go Outdated
@@ -83,7 +83,7 @@ var _ = Describe("ClusterOperator controller", func() {
Eventually(co).Should(HaveField("Status.Conditions",
SatisfyAll(
ContainElement(And(HaveField("Type", Equal(configv1.OperatorAvailable)), HaveField("Status", Equal(configv1.ConditionTrue)),
HaveField("Message", Equal(fmt.Sprintf("Cluster CAPI Operator is available at %s", desiredOperatorReleaseVersion))))),
HaveField("Message", Equal(fmt.Sprintf("Cluster Cluster API Operator is available at %s", desiredOperatorReleaseVersion))))),
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This should stay as is.

pkg/controllers/capiinstaller/capi_installer_controller.go Outdated
@@ -277,14 +277,14 @@ func (r *CapiInstallerController) setAvailableCondition(ctx context.Context, log

conds := []configv1.ClusterOperatorStatusCondition{
operatorstatus.NewClusterOperatorStatusCondition(capiInstallerControllerAvailableCondition, configv1.ConditionTrue, operatorstatus.ReasonAsExpected,
"CAPI Installer Controller works as expected"),
"Cluster API Installer Controller works as expected"),
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

All these CAPI Installer Controller should stay as is, as that's the actual controller name.

pkg/operatorstatus/operator_status.go Outdated
@@ -70,7 +70,7 @@ func (r *ClusterOperatorStatusClient) SetStatusAvailable(ctx context.Context, av
}

if availableConditionMsg == "" {
availableConditionMsg = fmt.Sprintf("Cluster CAPI Operator is available at %s", r.ReleaseVersion)
availableConditionMsg = fmt.Sprintf("Cluster Cluster API Operator is available at %s", r.ReleaseVersion)
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This should not change

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot removed the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Mar 17, 2025
@openshift-ci OpenShift CI
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Mar 17, 2025

New changes are detected. LGTM label has been removed.

@RadekManak
Copy link
Contributor Author

/test unit

@openshift-merge-robot openshift-merge-robot added the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Mar 28, 2025
@openshift-merge-robot
Copy link
Contributor

PR needs rebase.

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.

@openshift-ci OpenShift CI
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Apr 15, 2025

@RadekManak: The following tests failed, say /retest to rerun all failed tests or /retest-required to rerun all mandatory failed tests:

Test name Commit Details Required Rerun command
ci/prow/e2e-gcp-capi-techpreview 9624ac5 link true /test e2e-gcp-capi-techpreview
ci/prow/e2e-gcp-ovn-techpreview 9624ac5 link true /test e2e-gcp-ovn-techpreview
ci/prow/okd-scos-e2e-aws-ovn 9624ac5 link false /test okd-scos-e2e-aws-ovn
ci/prow/regression-clusterinfra-cucushift-rehearse-capi-aws-ipi 9624ac5 link false /test regression-clusterinfra-cucushift-rehearse-capi-aws-ipi
ci/prow/e2e-openstack-ovn-techpreview 9624ac5 link true /test e2e-openstack-ovn-techpreview

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.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@damdo damdo damdo requested changes

@jeana-redhat jeana-redhat jeana-redhat approved these changes

@JoelSpeed JoelSpeed Awaiting requested review from JoelSpeed

@nrb nrb Awaiting requested review from nrb

Assignees

@damdo damdo

@theobarberbany theobarberbany

Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. jira/valid-reference Indicates that this PR references a valid Jira ticket of any type. needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
7 participants
@RadekManak @openshift-ci-robot @JoelSpeed @theobarberbany @damdo @openshift-merge-robot @jeana-redhat