Conversation
|
No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉 ℹ️ Recent review info⚙️ Run configurationConfiguration used: Central YAML (base), Organization UI (inherited) Review profile: CHILL Plan: Pro Run ID: 📒 Files selected for processing (1)
✅ Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (1)
📝 WalkthroughWalkthroughConfiguration parameter updated in Estimated code review effort🎯 1 (Trivial) | ⏱️ ~2 minutes 🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 2✅ Passed checks (2 passed)
✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings. Comment |
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents
Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed.
Inline comments:
In `@config/openshift/params.env`:
- Line 2: Remove the malformed entry in params.env (the single dot on line 2) so
every line follows KEY=VALUE syntax; open the params.env used by the
kustomization.yaml configMapGenerator and delete the '.' entry or replace it
with a valid KEY=VALUE pair to allow kustomization.yaml parsing to succeed.
🪄 Autofix (Beta)
Fix all unresolved CodeRabbit comments on this PR:
- Push a commit to this branch (recommended)
- Create a new PR with the fixes
ℹ️ Review info
⚙️ Run configuration
Configuration used: Central YAML (base), Organization UI (inherited)
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
Run ID: 682d999f-5de9-4c0b-ad29-f3472a5d9897
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
config/openshift/params.env
| @@ -1 +1,2 @@ | |||
| wva-controller-image=ghcr.io/llm-d/llm-d-workload-variant-autoscaler:v0.6-0 | |||
| wva-controller-image=ghcr.io/llm-d/llm-d-workload-variant-autoscaler:v0.6.0 | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why not use the quay.io/opendatahub/workload-variant-autoscaler:v0.6.0?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
good question
we have not really discuss if we wanna bring this back to upstream
if it only lives in ODH and RHDS, quay.io is better fit
if we use params.env in upstream then it will be ghcr.io
@vivekk16 wdyt?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
if this is blocking operator e2e we can get it merged first
and decide if we should move to quay.io or keep ghcr
There was a problem hiding this comment.
In my understanding params.env stays only in ODH and RHDS as part of overlay. It will not be backported to upstream. It would be better to have quay.io.
@pierDipi correct me if im wrong.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@zdtsw please create an issue, we can discuss this over the issue.
| @@ -1 +1,2 @@ | |||
| wva-controller-image=ghcr.io/llm-d/llm-d-workload-variant-autoscaler:v0.6-0 | |||
| wva-controller-image=ghcr.io/llm-d/llm-d-workload-variant-autoscaler:v0.6.0 | |||
| . No newline at end of file | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
v0.6-0 does not exist
it was a typo i added previouly
the fix is to use the correct tag v0.6.0
another option is we could use quay.io/opendatahub/workload-variant-autoscaler:odh-stable instead
Signed-off-by: Wen Zhou <wenzhou@redhat.com>
|
@zdtsw: The following test has Failed: OCI Artifact Browser URLInspecting Test Artifacts ManuallyTo inspect your test artifacts manually, follow these steps:
mkdir -p oras-artifacts
cd oras-artifacts
oras pull quay.io/opendatahub/odh-ci-artifacts:odh-pr-test-trainer-9zzd2 |
6 participants
Description
ref https://redhat-internal.slack.com/archives/C093GBHMZC7/p1775747985728649
a typo in the tag only in ODH which blocks Operator e2e tests
How Has This Been Tested?
Merge criteria:
Summary by CodeRabbit