-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 72
Bug 2095329: [release-4.10] Bump go to v1.17 (#922) #310
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
Bug 2095329: [release-4.10] Bump go to v1.17 (#922) #310
Conversation
@perdasilva: No Bugzilla bug is referenced in the title of this pull request. In response to this:
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/test-infra repository. |
@perdasilva: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 2083919, which is invalid:
Comment In response to this:
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/test-infra repository. |
/bugzilla refresh |
@perdasilva: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 2083919, which is invalid:
Comment In response to this:
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/test-infra repository. |
/lgtm |
/bugzilla refresh Recalculating validity in case the underlying Bugzilla bug has changed. |
@openshift-bot: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 2083919, which is invalid:
Comment In response to this:
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/test-infra repository. |
/bugzilla refresh Recalculating validity in case the underlying Bugzilla bug has changed. |
@openshift-bot: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 2083919, which is invalid:
Comment In response to this:
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/test-infra repository. |
/bugzilla refresh Recalculating validity in case the underlying Bugzilla bug has changed. |
@openshift-bot: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 2083919, which is invalid:
Comment In response to this:
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/test-infra repository. |
8ecb2d1
to
c88dcc6
Compare
cc8120c
to
fc86d73
Compare
fc86d73
to
7f8ad59
Compare
7f8ad59
to
1a99acb
Compare
/bugzilla refresh |
@jianzhangbjz: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 2083919, which is invalid:
Comment In response to this:
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/test-infra repository. |
/label cherry-pick-approved |
It looks like we don't have a 4.11 parent BZ, so we'll need to retarget the referenced BZ to 4.11 and verify that first before we can start the backport process to the release-4.10 branch. /hold |
Does that make sense though? 4.11 is already on go1.17 |
I think the intention is to make sure the proper backport chain has been followed, and in cases like this it doesn't make much sense as 4.11 is already on Go 1.17, and so we'd need to either flip a 4.11 BZ to MODIFIED/ON_QA/VERIFIED and create a cherry-pick 4.10 BZ here in order to make the BZ bot, or we'd have someone override that valid-bug label. |
/label backport-risk-assessed |
@perdasilva: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 2095329, which is invalid:
Comment In response to this:
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/test-infra repository. |
/hold cancel |
/bugzilla refresh Recalculating validity in case the underlying Bugzilla bug has changed. |
@openshift-bot: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 2095329, which is invalid:
Comment In response to this:
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/test-infra repository. |
/bugzilla refresh |
@jianzhangbjz: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 2095329, which is valid. The bug has been moved to the POST state. 6 validation(s) were run on this bug
No GitHub users were found matching the public email listed for the QA contact in Bugzilla ([email protected]), skipping review request. In response to this:
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/test-infra repository. |
/label cherry-pick-approved |
@perdasilva: All pull requests linked via external trackers have merged: Bugzilla bug 2095329 has been moved to the MODIFIED state. In response to this:
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/test-infra repository. |
/bugzilla refresh |
@perdasilva: Bugzilla bug 2095329 is in an unrecognized state (VERIFIED) and will not be moved to the MODIFIED state. In response to this:
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/test-infra repository. |
Signed-off-by: Joe Lanford <[email protected]> Upstream-repository: api Upstream-commit: 0d032b99c9cf9b73445ad9f5f46485d58a39a7e9
Signed-off-by: Joe Lanford <[email protected]> Upstream-repository: api Upstream-commit: 0d032b99c9cf9b73445ad9f5f46485d58a39a7e9
This commit updates the operator-registry's go version
to v1.17.
Signed-off-by: Alexander Greene [email protected]
Upstream-repository: operator-registry
Upstream-commit: c970d617ce2d77c096102e2d881a15ef680bacf9