Skip to content

NO-ISSUE: Update nmstate Go bindings to 2.2.43 #7579

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
Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open

NO-ISSUE: Update nmstate Go bindings to 2.2.43 #7579

wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

jhernand
Copy link
Contributor

This patch updates the version of the nmstate Go bindings that we use to 2.2.43, in order to be able to use the new GenerateStateFromPolicy function that was introduced in that version.

The patch also inclues new test to verify that the function exists, but doesn't use it in any real way. That should be included in future patches, which should also probably remove that test.

You can see in the diffs of the vendor directory that the only real change is the introduction of that function, everything else remains the same, so this shoul be safe.

Note that in the go.mod file we have to use the commit instead of the v2.2.43 tag because of how the Go code is nested within the git repository of the project.

Related: nmstate/nmstate@c21cec1

List all the issues related to this PR

  • New Feature
  • Enhancement
  • Bug fix
  • Tests
  • Documentation
  • CI/CD

What environments does this code impact?

  • Automation (CI, tools, etc)
  • Cloud
  • Operator Managed Deployments
  • None

How was this code tested?

  • assisted-test-infra environment
  • dev-scripts environment
  • Reviewer's test appreciated
  • Waiting for CI to do a full test run
  • Manual (Elaborate on how it was tested)
  • No tests needed

Tested using the included unit tests.

Checklist

  • Title and description added to both, commit and PR.
  • Relevant issues have been associated (see CONTRIBUTING guide)
  • This change does not require a documentation update (docstring, docs, README, etc)
  • Does this change include unit-tests (note that code changes require unit-tests)

Reviewers Checklist

  • Are the title and description (in both PR and commit) meaningful and clear?
  • Is there a bug required (and linked) for this change?
  • Should this PR be backported?

@jhernand
NO-ISSUE: Update nmstate Go bindings to 2.2.43
ebcc815 
This patch updates the version of the _nmstate_ Go bindings that we use
to 2.2.43, in order to be able to use the new `GenerateStateFromPolicy`
function that was introduced in that version.

The patch also inclues new test to verify that the function exists, but
doesn't use it in any real way. That should be included in future
patches, which should also probably remove that test.

You can see in the diffs of the _vendor_ directory that the only real
change is the introduction of that function, everything else remains the
same, so this shoul be safe.

Note that in the `go.mod` file we have to use the commit instead of the
`v2.2.43` tag because of how the Go code is nested within the git
repository of the project.

Related: nmstate/nmstate@c21cec1
Signed-off-by: Juan Hernandez <[email protected]>
@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the jira/valid-reference Indicates that this PR references a valid Jira ticket of any type. label Apr 17, 2025
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link

@jhernand: This pull request explicitly references no jira issue.

In response to this:

This patch updates the version of the nmstate Go bindings that we use to 2.2.43, in order to be able to use the new GenerateStateFromPolicy function that was introduced in that version.

The patch also inclues new test to verify that the function exists, but doesn't use it in any real way. That should be included in future patches, which should also probably remove that test.

You can see in the diffs of the vendor directory that the only real change is the introduction of that function, everything else remains the same, so this shoul be safe.

Note that in the go.mod file we have to use the commit instead of the v2.2.43 tag because of how the Go code is nested within the git repository of the project.

Related: nmstate/nmstate@c21cec1

List all the issues related to this PR

  • New Feature
  • Enhancement
  • Bug fix
  • Tests
  • Documentation
  • CI/CD

What environments does this code impact?

  • Automation (CI, tools, etc)
  • Cloud
  • Operator Managed Deployments
  • None

How was this code tested?

  • assisted-test-infra environment
  • dev-scripts environment
  • Reviewer's test appreciated
  • Waiting for CI to do a full test run
  • Manual (Elaborate on how it was tested)
  • No tests needed

Tested using the included unit tests.

Checklist

  • Title and description added to both, commit and PR.
  • Relevant issues have been associated (see CONTRIBUTING guide)
  • This change does not require a documentation update (docstring, docs, README, etc)
  • Does this change include unit-tests (note that code changes require unit-tests)

Reviewers Checklist

  • Are the title and description (in both PR and commit) meaningful and clear?
  • Is there a bug required (and linked) for this change?
  • Should this PR be backported?

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.

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the size/S Denotes a PR that changes 10-29 lines, ignoring generated files. label Apr 17, 2025
@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot requested review from avishayt and eliorerz April 17, 2025 09:37
@openshift-ci OpenShift CI
Copy link

openshift-ci bot commented Apr 17, 2025

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: jhernand

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 Apr 17, 2025
@jhernand
Copy link
Contributor Author

FYI: @linoyaslan @liangwen12year

@jhernand
Copy link
Contributor Author

/hold

This is just to verify that the new function exists. We will probably want to include these changes in the pull request that does use the new function.

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. label Apr 17, 2025
@linoyaslan
Copy link
Contributor

@jhernand Thank you very much, Juan! I’ll make the same update once I start implementing and using it.

@codecov Codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Apr 17, 2025 •
edited
Loading

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 67.30%. Comparing base (b995a4c) to head (ebcc815).

Additional details and impacted files

Impacted file tree graph

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master    #7579   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   67.29%   67.30%           
=======================================
  Files         334      334           
  Lines       42301    42301           
=======================================
+ Hits        28468    28472    +4     
+ Misses      11259    11257    -2     
+ Partials     2574     2572    -2
Files with missing lines Coverage Δ
pkg/staticnetworkconfig/generator.go 67.31% <ø> (ø)

... and 2 files with indirect coverage changes

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

@openshift-ci OpenShift CI
Copy link

openshift-ci bot commented Apr 17, 2025

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

Test name Commit Details Required Rerun command
ci/prow/edge-e2e-metal-assisted-4-19 ebcc815 link true /test edge-e2e-metal-assisted-4-19
ci/prow/okd-scos-e2e-aws-ovn ebcc815 link false /test okd-scos-e2e-aws-ovn
ci/prow/edge-e2e-ai-operator-ztp ebcc815 link true /test edge-e2e-ai-operator-ztp
ci/prow/edge-images ebcc815 link true /test edge-images
ci/prow/edge-lint ebcc815 link true /test edge-lint
ci/prow/e2e-agent-compact-ipv4 ebcc815 link true /test e2e-agent-compact-ipv4
ci/prow/images ebcc815 link true /test images

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard.

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.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@avishayt avishayt Awaiting requested review from avishayt

@eliorerz eliorerz Awaiting requested review from eliorerz

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. jira/valid-reference Indicates that this PR references a valid Jira ticket of any type. size/S Denotes a PR that changes 10-29 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
3 participants
@jhernand @openshift-ci-robot @linoyaslan