⚠️ Align Spec fields to optionalfields API conventions #12431

sbueringer · 2025-07-01T16:13:31Z

Which issue(s) this PR fixes (optional, in fixes #<issue number>(, fixes #<issue_number>, ...) format, will close the issue(s) when PR gets merged):
Part of #10852

sbueringer · 2025-07-01T16:14:21Z

/test pull-cluster-api-e2e-main

sbueringer

/hold
for discussion

@fabriziopandini @JoelSpeed PTAL

api/addons/v1beta2/clusterresourceset_types.go

api/addons/v1beta2/clusterresourcesetbinding_types.go

api/core/v1beta2/machine_types.go

api/core/v1beta2/machinedeployment_types.go

api/core/v1beta2/machinehealthcheck_types.go

sbueringer · 2025-07-01T16:22:41Z

api/core/v1beta2/cluster_types.go

@@ -1184,8 +1185,8 @@ type Cluster struct {
 	metav1.ObjectMeta `json:"metadata,omitempty"`

 	// spec is the desired state of Cluster.
-	// +optional
-	Spec ClusterSpec `json:"spec,omitempty"`
+	// +required


required because either Cluster.spec.topology or Cluster.spec.controlPlaneRef / infrastructureRef should be set. An empty Cluster does not work

Is that validated in a webhook currently? That should be easy to validate in CEL and would make it easier to appreciate that this rule exists

No, there is no validation today. Neither in OpenAPI validation nor in the webhook.

We could probably build some ratcheting validation to enforce this in the future, something for the backlog maybe

Yeah, will track as a follow-up to improve this (we'll also write up the variations of infraRef/cpRef/topology being set/unset that make sense)

api/bootstrap/kubeadm/v1beta2/kubeadmconfig_types.go

api/bootstrap/kubeadm/v1beta2/kubeadmconfigtemplate_types.go

api/controlplane/kubeadm/v1beta2/kubeadm_control_plane_types.go

api/controlplane/kubeadm/v1beta2/kubeadmcontrolplanetemplate_types.go

sbueringer · 2025-07-01T16:39:57Z

/test pull-cluster-api-e2e-main

sbueringer · 2025-07-01T16:42:45Z

/test pull-cluster-api-e2e-main

api/addons/v1beta2/clusterresourceset_types.go

api/bootstrap/kubeadm/v1beta2/kubeadmconfig_types.go

api/bootstrap/kubeadm/v1beta2/kubeadmconfigtemplate_types.go

api/controlplane/kubeadm/v1beta2/kubeadmcontrolplanetemplate_types.go

JoelSpeed · 2025-07-02T08:23:19Z

api/controlplane/kubeadm/v1beta2/kubeadmcontrolplanetemplate_types.go

+	// +optional
+	Spec KubeadmControlPlaneTemplateResourceSpec `json:"spec,omitempty,omitzero"`


Why change from required?

I think it actually is optional and I aligned this here to the same field in KubeadmConfigTemplate which is also optional

Verified it is actually optional

JoelSpeed · 2025-07-02T08:24:35Z

api/core/v1beta2/cluster_types.go

@@ -1184,8 +1185,8 @@ type Cluster struct {
 	metav1.ObjectMeta `json:"metadata,omitempty"`

 	// spec is the desired state of Cluster.
-	// +optional
-	Spec ClusterSpec `json:"spec,omitempty"`
+	// +required


Is that validated in a webhook currently? That should be easy to validate in CEL and would make it easier to appreciate that this rule exists

sbueringer · 2025-07-02T19:18:53Z

Rebased on top of main

sbueringer · 2025-07-02T19:19:07Z

/test pull-cluster-api-e2e-main

sbueringer · 2025-07-03T08:05:27Z

/test pull-cluster-api-e2e-main

sbueringer · 2025-07-03T17:21:14Z

/test pull-cluster-api-e2e-main

fabriziopandini · 2025-07-03T19:15:27Z

Great Job!
Tested all the resources one by one by creating objects without spec and then object with the minimal supported spec, everything works nicely

/lgtm

k8s-ci-robot · 2025-07-03T19:15:34Z

LGTM label has been added.

Git tree hash: d09fe1cfe1fc6574f218cdf476f0b8852b8361a7

sbueringer · 2025-07-04T05:31:36Z

/override pull-cluster-api-e2e-main

Unrelated flake. I have a PR stacked on top of this and the test there is green (but also a bit flaky sometimes)

EDIT: This test (https://prow.k8s.io/view/gs/kubernetes-ci-logs/pr-logs/pull/kubernetes-sigs_cluster-api/12431/pull-cluster-api-e2e-main/1940969900210130944) became flaky very recently across all our branches (including release-1.10 / release-1.9 / release-1.8). So entirely unrelated to this PR.

k8s-ci-robot · 2025-07-04T05:31:39Z

@sbueringer: Overrode contexts on behalf of sbueringer: pull-cluster-api-e2e-main

In response to this:

/override pull-cluster-api-e2e-main

Unrelated flake. I have a PR stacked on top of this and the test there is green (but also a bit flaky sometimes)

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.

sbueringer · 2025-07-04T05:32:07Z

Going to merge this one so we can already review #12299 more easily (Fabrizio is on PTO next week)

@JoelSpeed If you have further findings, just let me know and I'll follow-up quickly

/approve

k8s-ci-robot · 2025-07-04T05:32:16Z

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: sbueringer

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:

~~OWNERS~~ [sbueringer]

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

sbueringer · 2025-07-04T05:56:51Z

/hold cancel

k8s-ci-robot requested review from g-gaston and JoelSpeed July 1, 2025 16:13

sbueringer mentioned this pull request Jul 1, 2025

Umbrella issue: API changes in v1.11 / v1beta2 #10852

Closed

62 tasks

sbueringer added the area/api Issues or PRs related to the APIs label Jul 1, 2025

k8s-ci-robot removed the do-not-merge/needs-area PR is missing an area label label Jul 1, 2025

sbueringer force-pushed the pr-optionalfields-spec branch from e0ec217 to dbe8095 Compare July 1, 2025 16:35

sbueringer commented Jul 1, 2025

View reviewed changes

k8s-ci-robot added the do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. label Jul 1, 2025

sbueringer changed the title ~~[WIP] ⚠️ Align Spec fields to optionalfields API conventions~~ ⚠️ Align Spec fields to optionalfields API conventions Jul 1, 2025

k8s-ci-robot removed the do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. label Jul 1, 2025

sbueringer force-pushed the pr-optionalfields-spec branch from dbe8095 to 14067e6 Compare July 1, 2025 16:42

kubernetes-sigs deleted a comment from k8s-ci-robot Jul 1, 2025

JoelSpeed reviewed Jul 2, 2025

View reviewed changes

sbueringer force-pushed the pr-optionalfields-spec branch 2 times, most recently from 9e87ba6 to b51663d Compare July 2, 2025 19:15

Align Spec fields to optionalfields API conventions

65740d0

sbueringer force-pushed the pr-optionalfields-spec branch from b51663d to c099e66 Compare July 2, 2025 19:18

Fix review findings

d35e8dc

sbueringer force-pushed the pr-optionalfields-spec branch from c099e66 to d35e8dc Compare July 3, 2025 07:24

k8s-ci-robot added size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files. and removed size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files. labels Jul 3, 2025

sbueringer force-pushed the pr-optionalfields-spec branch 2 times, most recently from 341c983 to 717a702 Compare July 3, 2025 08:05

Fix unit tests

8573573

sbueringer force-pushed the pr-optionalfields-spec branch from 717a702 to 8573573 Compare July 3, 2025 17:14

sbueringer added the tide/merge-method-squash Denotes a PR that should be squashed by tide when it merges. label Jul 3, 2025

k8s-ci-robot assigned fabriziopandini Jul 3, 2025

k8s-ci-robot added the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Jul 3, 2025

k8s-ci-robot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Jul 4, 2025

k8s-ci-robot removed the do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. label Jul 4, 2025

k8s-ci-robot merged commit 17b5d2a into kubernetes-sigs:main Jul 4, 2025
20 checks passed

k8s-ci-robot added this to the v1.11 milestone Jul 4, 2025

sbueringer deleted the pr-optionalfields-spec branch July 4, 2025 06:40

		// +optional
		Spec KubeadmControlPlaneTemplateResourceSpec `json:"spec,omitempty,omitzero"`

⚠️ Align Spec fields to optionalfields API conventions #12431

⚠️ Align Spec fields to optionalfields API conventions #12431

Uh oh!

Conversation

sbueringer commented Jul 1, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

sbueringer commented Jul 1, 2025

Uh oh!

sbueringer left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

sbueringer Jul 2, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

sbueringer commented Jul 1, 2025

Uh oh!

sbueringer commented Jul 1, 2025

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

sbueringer commented Jul 2, 2025

Uh oh!

sbueringer commented Jul 2, 2025

Uh oh!

sbueringer commented Jul 3, 2025

Uh oh!

sbueringer commented Jul 3, 2025

Uh oh!

fabriziopandini commented Jul 3, 2025

Uh oh!

k8s-ci-robot commented Jul 3, 2025

Uh oh!

sbueringer commented Jul 4, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

k8s-ci-robot commented Jul 4, 2025

Uh oh!

sbueringer commented Jul 4, 2025

Uh oh!

k8s-ci-robot commented Jul 4, 2025

Uh oh!

sbueringer commented Jul 4, 2025

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

sbueringer commented Jul 1, 2025 •

edited

Loading

sbueringer Jul 2, 2025 •

edited

Loading

sbueringer commented Jul 4, 2025 •

edited

Loading