Skip to content

⚠️ Fix required fields linter findings #12558

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
Merged
merged 10 commits into from
Aug 1, 2025
Merged

⚠️ Fix required fields linter findings #12558

merged 10 commits into from
Aug 1, 2025

Conversation

sbueringer
Copy link
Member

@sbueringer sbueringer commented Jul 31, 2025 •
edited
Loading

What this PR does / why we need it:

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

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. do-not-merge/needs-area PR is missing an area label size/XXL Denotes a PR that changes 1000+ lines, ignoring generated files. labels Jul 31, 2025
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot requested review from elmiko and g-gaston July 31, 2025 11:37
@sbueringer sbueringer added the area/api Issues or PRs related to the APIs label Jul 31, 2025
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot removed the do-not-merge/needs-area PR is missing an area label label Jul 31, 2025
@sbueringer sbueringer force-pushed the pr-required-fields-next branch from f19ea07 to ddfb066 Compare July 31, 2025 14:17
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Jul 31, 2025
@sbueringer sbueringer force-pushed the pr-required-fields-next branch from ddfb066 to 1f1c02f Compare July 31, 2025 14:23
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot removed the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Jul 31, 2025
@sbueringer
Copy link
Member Author

/test pull-cluster-api-e2e-main-gke

@sbueringer sbueringer force-pushed the pr-required-fields-next branch from 1f1c02f to 2afbdee Compare July 31, 2025 14:44
@sbueringer
Copy link
Member Author

/test pull-cluster-api-e2e-main-gke

JoelSpeed
JoelSpeed reviewed Jul 31, 2025
View reviewed changes
controlplane/kubeadm/internal/controllers/remediation.go Outdated
@@ -668,7 +668,7 @@ type RemediationData struct {
Machine string `json:"machine"`

// timestamp is when last remediation happened. It is represented in RFC3339 form and is in UTC.
Timestamp metav1.Time `json:"timestamp,omitempty,omitzero"`
Timestamp metav1.Time `json:"timestamp"`
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Oh? I realise they have no effect because of the custom marshalers, but, better to include for consistency?

Copy link
Member Author

@sbueringer sbueringer Jul 31, 2025 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I'm fine either way. I currently reverted that change. We are always setting all 3 fields when we use this struct

(this struct is in an internal package)

@fabriziopandini opinions?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I leave it as it, it is not an API

sbueringer
sbueringer commented Jul 31, 2025
View reviewed changes
fabriziopandini
fabriziopandini reviewed Jul 31, 2025
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@fabriziopandini fabriziopandini left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks for this PR!

@sbueringer sbueringer force-pushed the pr-required-fields-next branch from 2afbdee to 260f937 Compare July 31, 2025 18:46
@sbueringer sbueringer changed the title [WIP] ⚠️ Required fields last part ⚠️ Fix required fiels linter findings Jul 31, 2025
@k8s-ci-robot 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 31, 2025
@sbueringer sbueringer force-pushed the pr-required-fields-next branch from 260f937 to 0290441 Compare July 31, 2025 18:47
@sbueringer
Copy link
Member Author

@JoelSpeed @fabriziopandini Rebased

/test pull-cluster-api-e2e-main-gke

@sbueringer sbueringer changed the title ⚠️ Fix required fiels linter findings ⚠️ Fix required fields linter findings Jul 31, 2025
@fabriziopandini
Copy link
Member

/lgtm

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Jul 31, 2025
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

LGTM label has been added.

Git tree hash: 7f99c78e64975088e519b881c26b8c7c001a4ee8

@fabriziopandini fabriziopandini added the tide/merge-method-squash Denotes a PR that should be squashed by tide when it merges. label Jul 31, 2025
@sbueringer sbueringer force-pushed the pr-required-fields-next branch from 0290441 to cad618a Compare August 1, 2025 10:07
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot removed the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Aug 1, 2025
@sbueringer
Copy link
Member Author

Had to rebase because of a conflict

@kubernetes-sigs kubernetes-sigs deleted a comment from k8s-ci-robot Aug 1, 2025
@sbueringer
Copy link
Member Author

/test pull-cluster-api-e2e-main

@sbueringer sbueringer force-pushed the pr-required-fields-next branch from 9680ca1 to 3ee911d Compare August 1, 2025 10:24
@sbueringer
Copy link
Member Author

/test pull-cluster-api-e2e-main

@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

k8s-ci-robot commented Aug 1, 2025 •
edited
Loading

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

Test name Commit Details Required Rerun command
pull-cluster-api-apidiff-main 3ee911d link false /test pull-cluster-api-apidiff-main

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard. Please help us cut down on flakes by linking to an open issue when you hit one in your PR.

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.

JoelSpeed
JoelSpeed reviewed Aug 1, 2025
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@JoelSpeed JoelSpeed left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

/lgtm

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Aug 1, 2025
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

LGTM label has been added.

Git tree hash: 052fb6d482f1da81ce034879df6f06f5e83fc5dc

@fabriziopandini
Copy link
Member

/approve

@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: fabriziopandini

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

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Aug 1, 2025
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot merged commit 5cfc702 into kubernetes-sigs:main Aug 1, 2025
18 of 19 checks passed
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added this to the v1.11 milestone Aug 1, 2025
@sbueringer sbueringer deleted the pr-required-fields-next branch August 1, 2025 13:38
@sbueringer sbueringer mentioned this pull request Aug 4, 2025
Merged
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@elmiko elmiko Awaiting requested review from elmiko

@g-gaston g-gaston Awaiting requested review from g-gaston

@fabriziopandini fabriziopandini Awaiting requested review from fabriziopandini

1 more reviewer

@JoelSpeed JoelSpeed JoelSpeed left review comments

Reviewers whose approvals may not affect merge requirements
Assignees

@fabriziopandini fabriziopandini

@JoelSpeed JoelSpeed

Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. area/api Issues or PRs related to the APIs cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. size/XXL Denotes a PR that changes 1000+ lines, ignoring generated files. tide/merge-method-squash Denotes a PR that should be squashed by tide when it merges.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
v1.11
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
4 participants
@sbueringer @fabriziopandini @k8s-ci-robot @JoelSpeed