OCPBUGS-42526: The openshift-operator-lifecycle-manager namespaces still use old pod-security.kubernetes.io/*-version v1.24 and v1.25 respectively #967

camilamacedo86 · 2025-03-03T13:28:40Z

See that we have also a PR to change the files used in upstream: #966
However, this one is specific to downstream/OCP manifests

openshift-ci-robot · 2025-03-03T13:29:48Z

@camilamacedo86: This pull request explicitly references no jira issue.

In response to this:

Closes: https://github.com/openshift/operator-framework-olm/pull/966/commits

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.

camilamacedo86 · 2025-03-03T18:00:57Z

/test e2e-gcp-console-olm

camilamacedo86 · 2025-03-03T18:01:03Z

/test e2e-gcp-olm-flaky

camilamacedo86 · 2025-03-03T23:55:43Z

/test e2e-gcp-console-olm

camilamacedo86 · 2025-03-04T02:46:29Z

/test e2e-gcp-console-olm

jianzhangbjz · 2025-03-04T03:21:01Z

Hi @camilamacedo86 , I guess this PR is for https://issues.redhat.com/browse/OCPBUGS-42526, right? If yes, it's better to add the OCPBUGS-42526 strgins as the PR title prefix so that JIRA bot can update the status automatically.

camilamacedo86 · 2025-03-04T08:28:34Z

Hi @jianzhangbjz

Hi @camilamacedo86 , I guess this PR is for https://issues.redhat.com/browse/OCPBUGS-42526, right? If yes, it's better to add the OCPBUGS-42526 strgins as the PR title prefix so that JIRA bot can update the status automatically.

We need a Jira for each OCP version / component :-(
I will create the JIRAs

camilamacedo86 · 2025-03-04T08:30:30Z

/test e2e-gcp-console-olm

jianzhangbjz · 2025-03-04T09:07:16Z

We need a Jira for each OCP version / component :-(
I will create the JIRAs

Yes, but I don't think you need to do this manually. Once cherry-pick release-4.18 is labeled, the jira-bot will create it automatically. But, you need to add the bug ID as the title prefix.

jianzhangbjz · 2025-03-04T09:08:05Z

And, I tested this PR, looks good, details: https://issues.redhat.com/browse/OCPBUGS-42526
/label qe-approved

openshift-ci · 2025-03-04T20:16:13Z

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: camilamacedo86
Once this PR has been reviewed and has the lgtm label, please assign tmshort for approval. For more information see the Code Review Process.

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

DOWNSTREAM_OWNERS

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

openshift-ci-robot · 2025-03-04T20:19:37Z

@camilamacedo86: This pull request references Jira Issue OCPBUGS-52318, which is valid. The bug has been moved to the POST state.

3 validation(s) were run on this bug

bug is open, matching expected state (open)
bug target version (4.19.0) matches configured target version for branch (4.19.0)
bug is in the state New, which is one of the valid states (NEW, ASSIGNED, POST)

No GitHub users were found matching the public email listed for the QA contact in Jira ([email protected]), skipping review request.

The bug has been updated to refer to the pull request using the external bug tracker.

In response to this:

Closes: https://github.com/openshift/operator-framework-olm/pull/966/commits

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-robot · 2025-03-04T20:20:42Z

@camilamacedo86: This pull request references Jira Issue OCPBUGS-52318, which is valid.

3 validation(s) were run on this bug

bug is open, matching expected state (open)
bug target version (4.19.0) matches configured target version for branch (4.19.0)
bug is in the state POST, which is one of the valid states (NEW, ASSIGNED, POST)

No GitHub users were found matching the public email listed for the QA contact in Jira ([email protected]), skipping review request.

The bug has been updated to refer to the pull request using the external bug tracker.

In response to this:

See that we have also a PR to change the files used in upstream: #966
However, this one is specific to downstream/OCP manifests

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.

jianzhangbjz · 2025-03-05T02:47:21Z

Hi @camilamacedo86 , this PR should be for https://issues.redhat.com/browse/OCPBUGS-42526 instead of https://issues.redhat.com/browse/OCPBUGS-52318. Because OLMv0 never uses the latest PSA label.

camilamacedo86 · 2025-03-05T06:24:55Z

Hi @jianzhangbjz

Hi @camilamacedo86 , this PR should be for https://issues.redhat.com/browse/OCPBUGS-42526 instead of https://issues.redhat.com/browse/OCPBUGS-52318. Because OLMv0 never uses the latest PSA label.

I could not use the original one for it because we need to do the same for other components, OLMv1 and the marketplace. So, if we use OCPBUGS-42526 for all when the first gets merged, we will have problems with the others.
But I see your point about the title and content being wrong. I will fix that. Thank you

camilamacedo86 · 2025-03-05T06:39:39Z

/retest-required

jianzhangbjz · 2025-03-05T06:52:16Z

I could not use the original one for it because we need to do the same for other components, OLMv1 and the marketplace.

Sorry, but why? This PR is for OLMv0, not OLMv1.

camilamacedo86 · 2025-03-05T09:57:48Z

HI @jianzhangbjz

Sorry, but why? This PR is for OLMv0, not OLMv1.

We need a JIRA for each version / project
The JIRA is for all projects and versions: https://issues.redhat.com/browse/OCPBUGS-42526
So, as we spoke via slack and here: https://issues.redhat.com/browse/OCPBUGS-42526?focusedId=26710231&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-26710231
We cannot use it for ALL prs.

camilamacedo86 · 2025-03-05T10:15:13Z

/test e2e-gcp-olm

camilamacedo86 · 2025-03-05T10:15:23Z

/test e2e-gcp-console-olm

camilamacedo86 · 2025-03-05T13:50:35Z

/test e2e-gcp-olm

/test e2e-gcp-console-olm

camilamacedo86 · 2025-03-05T17:28:36Z

/retest-required

openshift-ci · 2025-03-05T20:30:13Z

@camilamacedo86: 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/e2e-gcp-olm-flaky	`9556780`	link	false	`/test e2e-gcp-olm-flaky`
ci/prow/e2e-gcp-olm	`9556780`	link	true	`/test e2e-gcp-olm`
ci/prow/e2e-gcp-console-olm	`9556780`	link	true	`/test e2e-gcp-console-olm`

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.

jianzhangbjz · 2025-03-06T02:24:21Z

Based on https://redhat-internal.slack.com/archives/C06KP34REFJ/p1741224828143489?thread_ts=1739880491.760029&cid=C06KP34REFJ, we should use the latest instead of the pinned version.

jianzhangbjz · 2025-03-06T02:24:33Z

/hold
/remove-label qe-approved

openshift-ci-robot · 2025-03-06T02:24:43Z

@camilamacedo86: This pull request references Jira Issue OCPBUGS-52318, which is invalid:

expected the bug to be open, but it isn't
expected the bug to be in one of the following states: NEW, ASSIGNED, POST, but it is Closed (Duplicate) instead

Comment /jira refresh to re-evaluate validity if changes to the Jira bug are made, or edit the title of this pull request to link to a different bug.

The bug has been updated to refer to the pull request using the external bug tracker.

In response to this:

See that we have also a PR to change the files used in upstream: #966
However, this one is specific to downstream/OCP manifests

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.

jianzhangbjz · 2025-03-06T02:27:16Z

/retitle OCPBUGS-42526: The openshift-operator-lifecycle-manager namespaces still use old pod-security.kubernetes.io/*-version v1.24 and v1.25 respectively

openshift-ci-robot · 2025-03-06T02:27:28Z

@camilamacedo86: This pull request references Jira Issue OCPBUGS-42526, which is valid. The bug has been moved to the POST state.

3 validation(s) were run on this bug

bug is open, matching expected state (open)
bug target version (4.19.0) matches configured target version for branch (4.19.0)
bug is in the state ASSIGNED, which is one of the valid states (NEW, ASSIGNED, POST)

No GitHub users were found matching the public email listed for the QA contact in Jira ([email protected]), skipping review request.

The bug has been updated to refer to the pull request using the external bug tracker.

In response to this:

See that we have also a PR to change the files used in upstream: #966
However, this one is specific to downstream/OCP manifests

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.

camilamacedo86 · 2025-03-06T09:29:32Z

Closing since QE would like to set latest instead

openshift-ci-robot · 2025-03-06T09:29:35Z

@camilamacedo86: This pull request references Jira Issue OCPBUGS-42526. The bug has been updated to no longer refer to the pull request using the external bug tracker.

In response to this:

See that we have also a PR to change the files used in upstream: #966
However, this one is specific to downstream/OCP manifests

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 bot requested review from dinhxuanvu and joelanford March 3, 2025 13:29

camilamacedo86 changed the title ~~Fix psa~~ NO-ISSUE: fix: update PSA versions to match Kubernetes API version Mar 3, 2025

openshift-ci-robot added the jira/valid-reference Indicates that this PR references a valid Jira ticket of any type. label Mar 3, 2025

camilamacedo86 changed the title ~~NO-ISSUE: fix: update PSA versions to match Kubernetes API version~~ WIP: fix: update PSA versions to match Kubernetes API version Mar 4, 2025

openshift-ci bot added the do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. label Mar 4, 2025

openshift-ci bot added the qe-approved Signifies that QE has signed off on this PR label Mar 4, 2025

Fix OCP PSA labels for OCP manifests with k8s version

9556780

camilamacedo86 force-pushed the fix-psa branch from 5c1c9a1 to 9556780 Compare March 4, 2025 20:15

camilamacedo86 changed the title ~~WIP: fix: update PSA versions to match Kubernetes API version~~ OCPBUGS-52318: update PSA versions to match Kubernetes API version Mar 4, 2025

openshift-ci bot removed the do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. label Mar 4, 2025

openshift-ci-robot added jira/severity-moderate Referenced Jira bug's severity is moderate for the branch this PR is targeting. jira/valid-bug Indicates that a referenced Jira bug is valid for the branch this PR is targeting. labels Mar 4, 2025

camilamacedo86 changed the title ~~OCPBUGS-52318: update PSA versions to match Kubernetes API version~~ OCPBUGS-52318: Fix OCP PSA labels for OCP manifests with k8s version Mar 4, 2025

camilamacedo86 changed the title ~~OCPBUGS-52318: Fix OCP PSA labels for OCP manifests with k8s version~~ OCPBUGS-52318: The openshift-operator-lifecycle-manager and openshift-marketplace namespaces still use old pod-security.kubernetes.io/*-version v1.24 and v1.25 respectively Mar 5, 2025

openshift-ci bot added do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. and removed qe-approved Signifies that QE has signed off on this PR labels Mar 6, 2025

openshift-ci-robot added jira/invalid-bug Indicates that a referenced Jira bug is invalid for the branch this PR is targeting. and removed jira/valid-bug Indicates that a referenced Jira bug is valid for the branch this PR is targeting. labels Mar 6, 2025

openshift-ci-robot added jira/valid-bug Indicates that a referenced Jira bug is valid for the branch this PR is targeting. and removed jira/invalid-bug Indicates that a referenced Jira bug is invalid for the branch this PR is targeting. labels Mar 6, 2025

camilamacedo86 closed this Mar 6, 2025

OCPBUGS-42526: The openshift-operator-lifecycle-manager namespaces still use old pod-security.kubernetes.io/*-version v1.24 and v1.25 respectively #967

OCPBUGS-42526: The openshift-operator-lifecycle-manager namespaces still use old pod-security.kubernetes.io/*-version v1.24 and v1.25 respectively #967

Uh oh!

Conversation

camilamacedo86 commented Mar 3, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

openshift-ci-robot commented Mar 3, 2025

Uh oh!

camilamacedo86 commented Mar 3, 2025

Uh oh!

camilamacedo86 commented Mar 3, 2025

Uh oh!

camilamacedo86 commented Mar 3, 2025

Uh oh!

camilamacedo86 commented Mar 4, 2025

Uh oh!

jianzhangbjz commented Mar 4, 2025

Uh oh!

camilamacedo86 commented Mar 4, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

camilamacedo86 commented Mar 4, 2025

Uh oh!

jianzhangbjz commented Mar 4, 2025

Uh oh!

jianzhangbjz commented Mar 4, 2025

Uh oh!

openshift-ci bot commented Mar 4, 2025

Uh oh!

openshift-ci-robot commented Mar 4, 2025

Uh oh!

openshift-ci-robot commented Mar 4, 2025

Uh oh!

jianzhangbjz commented Mar 5, 2025

Uh oh!

camilamacedo86 commented Mar 5, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

camilamacedo86 commented Mar 5, 2025

Uh oh!

jianzhangbjz commented Mar 5, 2025

Uh oh!

camilamacedo86 commented Mar 5, 2025

Uh oh!

camilamacedo86 commented Mar 5, 2025

Uh oh!

camilamacedo86 commented Mar 5, 2025

Uh oh!

camilamacedo86 commented Mar 5, 2025

Uh oh!

camilamacedo86 commented Mar 5, 2025

Uh oh!

openshift-ci bot commented Mar 5, 2025

Uh oh!

jianzhangbjz commented Mar 6, 2025

Uh oh!

jianzhangbjz commented Mar 6, 2025

Uh oh!

openshift-ci-robot commented Mar 6, 2025

Uh oh!

jianzhangbjz commented Mar 6, 2025

Uh oh!

openshift-ci-robot commented Mar 6, 2025

Uh oh!

camilamacedo86 commented Mar 6, 2025

Uh oh!

openshift-ci-robot commented Mar 6, 2025

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

camilamacedo86 commented Mar 3, 2025 •

edited

Loading

camilamacedo86 commented Mar 4, 2025 •

edited

Loading

camilamacedo86 commented Mar 5, 2025 •

edited

Loading