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

CNF-14440: scorecard tests failing #206

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Sep 18, 2024

Conversation

irinamihai
Copy link
Collaborator

Description:

  • add spec descriptor
  • add resources to CRDs
  • rename ORANO2IMS to Inventory to make bundle building happy
  • adjust the groups and domains to match with the GVK
  • upversion to 4.17

@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Collaborator

openshift-ci-robot commented Sep 17, 2024

@irinamihai: This pull request references CNF-14440 which is a valid jira issue.

Warning: The referenced jira issue has an invalid target version for the target branch this PR targets: expected the bug to target the "4.18.0" version, but no target version was set.

In response to this:

Description:

  • add spec descriptor
  • add resources to CRDs
  • rename ORANO2IMS to Inventory to make bundle building happy
  • adjust the groups and domains to match with the GVK
  • upversion to 4.17

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.

DeploymentServerStatus string `json:"deploymentServerStatus,omitempty"`
// +operator-sdk:csv:customresourcedefinitions:type=status,displayName="Metadata Server Status"
// +operator-sdk:csv:customresourcedefinitions:type=status,displayName="MetadataServer tatus"
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

typo

@irinamihai irinamihai force-pushed the scorecard-2 branch 3 times, most recently from aaa0e55 to 94e93a3 Compare September 18, 2024 13:40
//+kubebuilder:rbac:groups=oran.openshift.io,resources=orano2imses,verbs=get;list;watch;create;update;patch;delete
//+kubebuilder:rbac:groups=oran.openshift.io,resources=orano2imses/status,verbs=get;update;patch
//+kubebuilder:rbac:groups=oran.openshift.io,resources=orano2imses/finalizers,verbs=update
//+kubebuilder:rbac:groups=oran.openshift.io,resources=Inventoryes,verbs=get;list;watch;create;update;patch;delete
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The plural of inventory should be inventories, no?

@@ -155,7 +155,7 @@ rules:
- apiGroups:
- oran.openshift.io
resources:
- clusterrequests
- Inventoryes
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Inventoryes -> Inventories?

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Updated in the latest patch. Thank you!

IngressHost string `json:"ingressHost,omitempty"`
}

type DeploymentsStatus struct {
// +operator-sdk:csv:customresourcedefinitions:type=status,displayName="Deployment Server Status"
// +operator-sdk:csv:customresourcedefinitions:type=status,displayName="DeploymentServerStatus"
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Shouldn't the spaces in the displayName be preserved? Isn't this used in UI elements for end users?

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I used TALM as an example which uses both ways, so I've decided to go with no spaces. I can change all of them to include spaces.

//+kubebuilder:rbac:groups=oran.openshift.io,resources=orano2imses/finalizers,verbs=update
//+kubebuilder:rbac:groups=oran.openshift.io,resources=Inventories,verbs=get;list;watch;create;update;patch;delete
//+kubebuilder:rbac:groups=oran.openshift.io,resources=Inventories/status,verbs=get;update;patch
//+kubebuilder:rbac:groups=oran.openshift.io,resources=Inventories/finalizers,verbs=update
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Should this be "inventories"?

@alegacy
Copy link
Contributor

alegacy commented Sep 18, 2024

/lgtm

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Sep 18, 2024
Description:
- add spec descriptor
- add resources to CRDs
- rename ORANO2IMS to Inventory to make bundle building happy
- adjust the groups and domains to match with the GVK
@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot removed the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Sep 18, 2024
@Missxiaoguo
Copy link
Collaborator

/lgtm

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Sep 18, 2024
@Missxiaoguo
Copy link
Collaborator

/approve

Copy link

openshift-ci bot commented Sep 18, 2024

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: Missxiaoguo

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 Sep 18, 2024
@openshift-merge-bot openshift-merge-bot bot merged commit 5c17992 into openshift-kni:main Sep 18, 2024
8 checks passed
donpenney added a commit to donpenney/oran-hwmgr-plugin-test that referenced this pull request Sep 18, 2024
Update test plugin to align with the following PRs:
openshift-kni/oran-o2ims#206
openshift-kni/oran-o2ims#209

Signed-off-by: Don Penney <[email protected]>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants