USHIFT-367: apply rebase.sh to openshift-dns manifests

[fzdarsky]

Updates the openshift-dns manifests using the latest rebase.sh automation.

Most changes are completely neutral and result from the adoption of yq, e.g. reordering of fields resulting from yq appending added fields at the end rather than ordering them in alphabetically or different indentation. A few changes drop comments or labels that are no longer applied by the respective operator. Most notable change is the adoption of the PSA labels for the namespace.

Signed-off-by: Frank A. Zdarsky fzdarsky@redhat.com

Partially addresses USHIFT-367

[stlaz]

/hold
the script appears to be generating suspicious whitespace changes

[fzdarsky]

/hold the script appears to be generating suspicious whitespace changes

@stlaz You're right that the indentation changes. This is an unfortunate side-effect of the rebase script editing manifests using yq, which lints YAML with a slightly different indentation for lists (see PR description), e.g.

containers:
- name: dns
  ...
- name: kube-rbac-proxy
  ...

becomes

containers:
  - name: dns
    ...
  - name: kube-rbac-proxy
    ...

[stlaz]

/hold cancel

I see, this is explained here: https://mikefarah.gitbook.io/yq/usage/output-format

I guess this was caused either by yq change or yq integration into the script. All good from me, then.

[fzdarsky]

/retest

[dhellmann]

Updates the openshift-dns manifests using the latest rebase.sh automation.

Most changes are completely neutral and result from the adoption of yq, e.g. reordering of fields resulting from yq appending added fields at the end rather than ordering them in alphabetically or different indentation. A few changes drop comments or labels that are no longer applied by the respective operator. Most notable change is the adoption of the PSA labels for the namespace.

Are the script changes to make those edits in another PR? Or is the script already updating these manifests but the versions in this PR come from a different release image?

[dhellmann]

/label needs-rebase

[openshift-ci]

@dhellmann: The label(s) /label needs-rebase cannot be applied. These labels are supported: platform/aws, platform/azure, platform/baremetal, platform/google, platform/libvirt, platform/openstack, ga, tide/merge-method-merge, tide/merge-method-rebase, tide/merge-method-squash, px-approved, docs-approved, qe-approved, downstream-change-needed, approved, backport-risk-assessed, bugzilla/valid-bug, cherry-pick-approved, jira/valid-bug, staff-eng-approved

Details

In response to this:

/label needs-rebase

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/test-infra repository.

[fzdarsky]

/retest

[pacevedom]

/lgtm

[openshift-ci-robot]

/retest-required

Remaining retests: 0 against base HEAD f4b540c and 2 for PR HEAD 063321357175fb6f0666e8c9f3a947f31ef0908e in total

[openshift-ci]

@fzdarsky: all tests passed!

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard.

Details

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/test-infra repository. I understand the commands that are listed here.

[pacevedom]

/lgtm

[openshift-ci]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: fzdarsky, pacevedom

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 [fzdarsky,pacevedom]

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