Skip to content

OCPBUGS-58212 Remove InsightsRuntimeExtractor Feature gate #2419

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

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

Conversation

jmesnil
Copy link

@jmesnil jmesnil commented Jul 24, 2025

This feature is GA-ed since OCP 4.19 and there is no longer any code in the Insights Operator that is gated against it.

The feature gate referenced was removed from the Insights Operator in openshift/insights-operator#1081.
For reference, this feature gate was introduced in OcP 4.18 with #1976.

Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Jul 24, 2025

Hello @jmesnil! Some important instructions when contributing to openshift/api:
API design plays an important part in the user experience of OpenShift and as such API PRs are subject to a high level of scrutiny to ensure they follow our best practices. If you haven't already done so, please review the OpenShift API Conventions and ensure that your proposed changes are compliant. Following these conventions will help expedite the api review process for your PR.

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the size/S Denotes a PR that changes 10-29 lines, ignoring generated files. label Jul 24, 2025
@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot requested review from everettraven and JoelSpeed July 24, 2025 11:44
@JoelSpeed
Copy link
Contributor

Hey @jmesnil @tremes, this PR has come as a surprise, as far as I was concerned, this feature hasn't GA'd yet?

Looking at sippy, I can't see any testing of the feature that would demonstrate that the feature is ready to GA either?

I think there may have been some miscommunication on the expectations of how feature gates are supposed to work on this feature, as openshift/insights-operator#1081 is not supposed to have happened until at least 1 release after the feature is promoted in o/api.

We would normally get the feature ready in tech preview, add gated tests, gather data about their stability, and then make a decision about when to promote them based on the test data. This document outlines the process in more detail.

I guess it's too late now, though I need to check what the implications of this are. Our release pipelines build reports on promoted features and this feeds into the release notes, it's quite possible your feature has silently GA'd and the correct outgoing comms for it haven't happened as expected

Do you have any automated testing reporting into component readiness for this feature?

@jmesnil
Copy link
Author

jmesnil commented Jul 24, 2025

@JoelSpeed thanks for the input, I'll check with the Insights Operator team to get you the info you ask.
I can at least confirm that this feature was properly communicated as being GA-ed in the OCP 4.19 release notes: https://docs.redhat.com/en/documentation/openshift_container_platform/4.19/html/release_notes/ocp-4-19-release-notes#ocp-release-notes-insights-operator-runtime-extractor_release-notes

@jmesnil
Copy link
Author

jmesnil commented Jul 30, 2025

/retest

@opokornyy
Copy link
Contributor

Hey @JoelSpeed @jmesnil, since yesterday the sippy should be showing the test results for the InsightsRuntimeExtractor.

@JoelSpeed, could you please take a look at this and let me know if the tests look correct?

@openshift-merge-robot openshift-merge-robot added the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Aug 6, 2025
This feature is GA-ed since OCP 4.19 and there is no longer any code in the Insights Operator that is
gated against it.

Signed-off-by: Jeff Mesnil <[email protected]>
@jmesnil jmesnil force-pushed the OCPBUGS-58212_remove_InsightsRuntimeExtractor_feature_gate branch from d333205 to 2dd438a Compare August 6, 2025 07:36
@openshift-merge-robot openshift-merge-robot removed the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Aug 6, 2025
@jmesnil
Copy link
Author

jmesnil commented Aug 6, 2025

/retest

1 similar comment
@jmesnil
Copy link
Author

jmesnil commented Aug 7, 2025

/retest

@JoelSpeed
Copy link
Contributor

/lgtm

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Aug 7, 2025
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Aug 7, 2025

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: jmesnil, JoelSpeed

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 Aug 7, 2025
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link

/retest-required

Remaining retests: 0 against base HEAD a42cd21 and 2 for PR HEAD 2dd438a in total

@JoelSpeed
Copy link
Contributor

/retest-required

@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link

/retest-required

Remaining retests: 0 against base HEAD 356d265 and 1 for PR HEAD 2dd438a in total

@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link

/retest-required

Remaining retests: 0 against base HEAD c974eea and 0 for PR HEAD 2dd438a in total

@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link

/hold

Revision 2dd438a was retested 3 times: holding

@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 Aug 8, 2025
@JoelSpeed
Copy link
Contributor

/hold cancel
/retest-required

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot removed the do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. label Aug 11, 2025
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link

/retest-required

Remaining retests: 0 against base HEAD c974eea and 2 for PR HEAD 2dd438a in total

@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link

/retest-required

Remaining retests: 0 against base HEAD cc869c8 and 1 for PR HEAD 2dd438a in total

@JoelSpeed
Copy link
Contributor

Single failure on a known flake, https://issues.redhat.com/browse/OCPBUGS-57658

/override ci/prow/e2e-aws-ovn-hypershift-conformance

Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Aug 11, 2025

@JoelSpeed: Overrode contexts on behalf of JoelSpeed: ci/prow/e2e-aws-ovn-hypershift-conformance

In response to this:

Single failure on a known flake, https://issues.redhat.com/browse/OCPBUGS-57658

/override ci/prow/e2e-aws-ovn-hypershift-conformance

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.

@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link

/retest-required

Remaining retests: 0 against base HEAD cc869c8 and 2 for PR HEAD 2dd438a in total

1 similar comment
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link

/retest-required

Remaining retests: 0 against base HEAD cc869c8 and 2 for PR HEAD 2dd438a in total

@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link

/retest-required

Remaining retests: 0 against base HEAD 213cdac and 1 for PR HEAD 2dd438a in total

@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link

/retest-required

Remaining retests: 0 against base HEAD 213cdac and 2 for PR HEAD 2dd438a in total

@JoelSpeed
Copy link
Contributor

Single failure on a known flake, https://issues.redhat.com/browse/OCPBUGS-57658

/override ci/prow/e2e-aws-ovn

Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Aug 12, 2025

@JoelSpeed: Overrode contexts on behalf of JoelSpeed: ci/prow/e2e-aws-ovn

In response to this:

Single failure on a known flake, https://issues.redhat.com/browse/OCPBUGS-57658

/override ci/prow/e2e-aws-ovn

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.

@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link

/retest-required

Remaining retests: 0 against base HEAD 8187a76 and 2 for PR HEAD 2dd438a in total

@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link

/retest-required

Remaining retests: 0 against base HEAD 88b2b21 and 1 for PR HEAD 2dd438a in total

@JoelSpeed
Copy link
Contributor

/retest-required

@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link

/retest-required

Remaining retests: 0 against base HEAD 88b2b21 and 2 for PR HEAD 2dd438a in total

3 similar comments
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link

/retest-required

Remaining retests: 0 against base HEAD 88b2b21 and 2 for PR HEAD 2dd438a in total

@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link

/retest-required

Remaining retests: 0 against base HEAD 88b2b21 and 2 for PR HEAD 2dd438a in total

@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link

/retest-required

Remaining retests: 0 against base HEAD 88b2b21 and 2 for PR HEAD 2dd438a in total

Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Aug 14, 2025

@jmesnil: The following test 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-aws-serial-techpreview-2of2 2dd438a link true /test e2e-aws-serial-techpreview-2of2

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
Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. size/S Denotes a PR that changes 10-29 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants