Repository navigation
Conversation
6778e65 to
8280aea
Compare
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. DetailsNeeds approval from an approver in each of these files:Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
| if len(o.ShardsPeerKubeconfigs) == 0 && len(o.RootKubeconfig) == 0 { | ||
| errs = append(errs, fmt.Errorf("--shard-peer-kubeconfig is required")) | ||
| } | ||
| if o.Authentication.ServiceAccountAuthEnabled() && len(o.RootKubeconfig) == 0 { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This will get removed in follow-up pr
|
/retest |
|
/retest |
3 similar comments
|
/retest |
|
/retest |
|
/retest |
|
@mjudeikis-bot review this |
mjudeikis-bot
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
No issues found. Checked: the APIIdentity informer filter and core identity handler against the admin view's label support, the non-blocking startup and readiness path (missing identities make requests error and informers retry), the optional root kubeconfig handling for service account auth and the seed peer, and the group-based metrics authorizer union.
Summary
This moves FP to use APIIdentities vs root shard.
After this change, we have only service accounts still using the root shard to resolve things. This will be follow-up PR.
What Type of PR Is This?
Related Issue(s)
Fixes #
Release Notes