-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 38.6k
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
added a comment that statuses lists are not being validated #124918
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
added a comment that statuses lists are not being validated #124918
Conversation
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: SergeyKanzhelev The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.
Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
This PR may require API review. If so, when the changes are ready, complete the pre-review checklist and request an API review. Status of requested reviews is tracked in the API Review project. |
/retest |
d99cfae
to
ce4c250
Compare
/triage accepted |
// init container will have ready = true, the most recently started container will have | ||
// startTime set. | ||
// The list must not contain entries with the same container name, and must only contain |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
If it's not enforced, then the right word is should
, instead of must
.
What type of PR is this?
/kind cleanup
/kind documentation
/sig node
/priority backlog
What this PR does / why we need it:
Adding a note to API will help troubleshoot issues in future. Ideally we need to add this validation to API, but it is not a priority and will require a big effort of ensuring backward compatibility. Thus I suggest we are limiting change with the documentation update.
Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
Related to: #124915
Special notes for your reviewer:
I also reviewed other instances where statuses collection is being iterated over. I didn't find anything dangerous there.
Please review commit-by-commit. It will be easier
Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?