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

Exclude CRD schema from transformation, fix #1737. #3456

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jan 15, 2020

Conversation

mgoltzsche
Copy link
Contributor

@mgoltzsche mgoltzsche commented Dec 27, 2019

Fixes #1737.

Description

Replaces the fuzzy Replacer/Matcher interfaces with a simple FieldVisitor interface.
In case the provided manifest is not a CustomResourceDefinition the provided visitor is decorated to perform recursion.

My issue comment here provides some background information.

Using this approach other transformation rules could be implemented as decorators of FieldVisitor objects as well.

cc @tejal29

User facing changes

Users will be able to deploy CRDs using skaffold.

Before

CRD deployment failed since skaffold added labels to the metadata specification within the CRD's OpenAPI schema which should actually remain untouched.

After

CRD fields other than in the first level are not traversed. Therefore CRD schemas remain untouched while the CRD is still labeled.

Submitter Checklist

  • Includes unit tests
  • Mentions any output changes.
  • Adds documentation as needed: user docs, YAML reference, CLI reference - none needed
  • Adds integration tests if needed - none needed

Reviewer Notes

  • The code flow looks good.
  • Unit test added.
  • User facing changes look good.

Release Notes

- CRD support: exclude schema from transformation

@googlebot
Copy link

Thanks for your pull request. It looks like this may be your first contribution to a Google open source project (if not, look below for help). Before we can look at your pull request, you'll need to sign a Contributor License Agreement (CLA).

📝 Please visit https://cla.developers.google.com/ to sign.

Once you've signed (or fixed any issues), please reply here with @googlebot I signed it! and we'll verify it.


What to do if you already signed the CLA

Individual signers
Corporate signers

ℹ️ Googlers: Go here for more info.

@mgoltzsche
Copy link
Contributor Author

@googlebot I signed it!

@googlebot
Copy link

CLAs look good, thanks!

ℹ️ Googlers: Go here for more info.

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Dec 27, 2019

Codecov Report

Merging #3456 into master will increase coverage by 0.08%.
The diff coverage is 100%.

Impacted Files Coverage Δ
pkg/skaffold/deploy/kubectl/labels.go 92.85% <100%> (+14.28%) ⬆️
pkg/skaffold/deploy/kubectl/namespaces.go 90.9% <100%> (+8.3%) ⬆️
pkg/skaffold/deploy/kubectl/images.go 100% <100%> (+7.27%) ⬆️
pkg/skaffold/deploy/kubectl/visitor.go 93.54% <100%> (-0.21%) ⬇️
...affold/kubernetes/portforward/kubectl_forwarder.go 65.85% <0%> (-2.44%) ⬇️
pkg/skaffold/util/tar.go 57.47% <0%> (+4.59%) ⬆️

Replaces the fuzzy `Replacer`/`Matcher` interfaces with a simple
`FieldVisitor` interface.
In case the provided manifest is not a `CustomResourceDefinition`
the provided visitor is decorated to perform recursion.
Copy link
Contributor

@dgageot dgageot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM. I'd like to wait for @tejal29's review

@dgageot dgageot added the kokoro:run runs the kokoro jobs on a PR label Dec 31, 2019
@kokoro-team kokoro-team removed the kokoro:run runs the kokoro jobs on a PR label Dec 31, 2019
Copy link
Contributor

@nkubala nkubala left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

nice!

@tejal29 tejal29 merged commit 92a8fc2 into GoogleContainerTools:master Jan 15, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

skaffold labels erroneously added to CRD validation schema metadata field
6 participants