Skip to content

Conversation

@wking
Copy link
Member

@wking wking commented Oct 28, 2019

The typo was originally from 898d7e3 (#127). The "any operator" bit explains why we don't want, for example, ingress-operator specific config in here. The later ClusterOperatorSpec comment goes into more detail on that with its pause hypothetical, but a bit of extra hinting can't hurt ;).

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the size/XS Denotes a PR that changes 0-9 lines, ignoring generated files. label Oct 28, 2019
@wking wking force-pushed the cluster-operator-spec-hold-typo branch from 825de45 to f9361ff Compare October 28, 2019 16:31
@damemi
Copy link
Contributor

damemi commented Oct 28, 2019

/lgtm

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Oct 28, 2019
Copy link
Contributor

@soltysh soltysh left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

/lgtm
/approve

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Nov 5, 2019
@openshift-bot
Copy link

/retest

Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes.

1 similar comment
@openshift-bot
Copy link

/retest

Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes.

The typo was originally from 898d7e3 (api: Move
ClusterVersion/ClusterOperator into config.openshift.io, 2018-11-09, openshift#127).
The "any operator" bit explains why we don't want, for example,
ingress-operator specific config in here.  The later
ClusterOperatorSpec comment goes into more detail on that with its
'pause' hypothetical, but a bit of extra hinting can't hurt ;).
@wking wking force-pushed the cluster-operator-spec-hold-typo branch from f9361ff to c6fbb2d Compare November 6, 2019 00:34
@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot removed the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Nov 6, 2019
@wking
Copy link
Member Author

wking commented Nov 6, 2019

Rebased around #500 with f9361ff -> c6fbb2d to resolve the neighboring-line conflict. Can I get a fresh /lgtm?

@smarterclayton
Copy link
Contributor

/lgtm
/approve

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Nov 24, 2019
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: damemi, smarterclayton, soltysh, wking

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

The pull request process is described here

Details Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:
  • OWNERS [smarterclayton,soltysh]

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

@openshift-bot
Copy link

/retest

Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes.

@openshift-merge-robot openshift-merge-robot merged commit 2ea89d2 into openshift:master Nov 24, 2019
@wking wking deleted the cluster-operator-spec-hold-typo branch August 3, 2020 22:38
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/XS Denotes a PR that changes 0-9 lines, ignoring generated files.

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

7 participants