Skip to content

Conversation

@MatteoFari
Copy link

What type of PR is this?

/kind cleanup

What this PR does / why we need it:

Enable nomaps for Kubernetes API Linter with all the exceptions

Which issue(s) this PR is related to:

Part of #134671

Special notes for your reviewer:

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?

NONE

Additional documentation e.g., KEPs (Kubernetes Enhancement Proposals), usage docs, etc.:


@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added kind/cleanup Categorizes issue or PR as related to cleaning up code, process, or technical debt. size/S Denotes a PR that changes 10-29 lines, ignoring generated files. do-not-merge/release-note-label-needed Indicates that a PR should not merge because it's missing one of the release note labels. cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. do-not-merge/needs-sig Indicates an issue or PR lacks a `sig/foo` label and requires one. needs-triage Indicates an issue or PR lacks a `triage/foo` label and requires one. labels Oct 24, 2025
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

This issue is currently awaiting triage.

If a SIG or subproject determines this is a relevant issue, they will accept it by applying the triage/accepted label and provide further guidance.

The triage/accepted label can be added by org members by writing /triage accepted in a comment.

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.

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the needs-ok-to-test Indicates a PR that requires an org member to verify it is safe to test. label Oct 24, 2025
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

Hi @MatteoFari. Thanks for your PR.

I'm waiting for a github.com member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with /ok-to-test on its own line. Until that is done, I will not automatically test new commits in this PR, but the usual testing commands by org members will still work. Regular contributors should join the org to skip this step.

Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the ok-to-test label.

I understand the commands that are listed here.

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.

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the needs-priority Indicates a PR lacks a `priority/foo` label and requires one. label Oct 24, 2025
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: MatteoFari
Once this PR has been reviewed and has the lgtm label, please assign liggitt 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:

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

@kannon92
Copy link
Contributor

/ok-to-test
/sig architecture

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added ok-to-test Indicates a non-member PR verified by an org member that is safe to test. sig/architecture Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Architecture. and removed needs-ok-to-test Indicates a PR that requires an org member to verify it is safe to test. do-not-merge/needs-sig Indicates an issue or PR lacks a `sig/foo` label and requires one. labels Oct 24, 2025
@MatteoFari
Copy link
Author

/release-note-none

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added release-note-none Denotes a PR that doesn't merit a release note. and removed do-not-merge/release-note-label-needed Indicates that a PR should not merge because it's missing one of the release note labels. labels Oct 25, 2025
@MatteoFari
Copy link
Author

/hold

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. label Oct 25, 2025
Copy link
Contributor

@JoelSpeed JoelSpeed left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I wasn't expecting there to be too many violations for this linter, can we get a count per API group that you've added an exclude for please?

path: "staging/src/k8s.io/api/networking/v1beta1/types.go"
path: "staging/src/k8s.io/api/networking/v1beta1/types.go"

# nomaps is being enabled over time. For now, each API group should be added to this list until we comb through each group and fix/ignore the issues.
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

How many different violations are there in these groups?

@MatteoFari MatteoFari changed the title Matteofari/enable nomaps linter Enable nomaps rule for Kube API Linter Oct 29, 2025
@MatteoFari MatteoFari force-pushed the matteofari/enable-nomaps-linter branch from 0bd4b10 to 40734a7 Compare October 29, 2025 11:07
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files. and removed size/S Denotes a PR that changes 10-29 lines, ignoring generated files. labels Oct 29, 2025

# nomaps - Permanent exception for stable (v1), older (v1beta1) and v1alpha1.
# This cannot be changed due to backward compatibility constraints.
- text: "should not use a map type, use a list type with a unique name/identifier instead"
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

To be properly scoped and effective here, we need to include the field names in the error messages. So I think lets try break this down further please, else we risk ignoring new violations in these groups

@MatteoFari MatteoFari force-pushed the matteofari/enable-nomaps-linter branch from 40734a7 to d7cbfee Compare October 29, 2025 16:18
@MatteoFari
Copy link
Author

@JoelSpeed I added the field names in the error messages so now it's better scoped. Let me know if I can go on doing the same for core and resource or should proceed in a different way.

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

Labels

cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. kind/cleanup Categorizes issue or PR as related to cleaning up code, process, or technical debt. needs-priority Indicates a PR lacks a `priority/foo` label and requires one. needs-triage Indicates an issue or PR lacks a `triage/foo` label and requires one. ok-to-test Indicates a non-member PR verified by an org member that is safe to test. release-note-none Denotes a PR that doesn't merit a release note. sig/architecture Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Architecture. size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files.

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants