Skip to content
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

Cloudprovider hetzner #3640

Closed
wants to merge 21 commits into from
Closed

Conversation

Fgruntjes
Copy link
Contributor

So I made a very basic implementation of a cloud provider for Hetzner Cloud. Now I am not sure if I did everything correctly so please let me know where you see any issues / improvements.

Once you are satisfied with the implementation I will add test cases to finalize.

@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

Thanks for your pull request. Before we can look at your pull request, you'll need to sign a Contributor License Agreement (CLA).

📝 Please follow instructions at https://git.k8s.io/community/CLA.md#the-contributor-license-agreement to sign the CLA.

It may take a couple minutes for the CLA signature to be fully registered; after that, please reply here with a new comment and we'll verify. Thanks.


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.

@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

Welcome @Fgruntjes!

It looks like this is your first PR to kubernetes/autoscaler 🎉. Please refer to our pull request process documentation to help your PR have a smooth ride to approval.

You will be prompted by a bot to use commands during the review process. Do not be afraid to follow the prompts! It is okay to experiment. Here is the bot commands documentation.

You can also check if kubernetes/autoscaler has its own contribution guidelines.

You may want to refer to our testing guide if you run into trouble with your tests not passing.

If you are having difficulty getting your pull request seen, please follow the recommended escalation practices. Also, for tips and tricks in the contribution process you may want to read the Kubernetes contributor cheat sheet. We want to make sure your contribution gets all the attention it needs!

Thank you, and welcome to Kubernetes. 😃

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added cncf-cla: no Indicates the PR's author has not signed the CNCF CLA. size/XXL Denotes a PR that changes 1000+ lines, ignoring generated files. labels Oct 23, 2020
@Fgruntjes Fgruntjes mentioned this pull request Oct 23, 2020
Copy link
Contributor

@mwielgus mwielgus left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We don't accept any new dependencies in vendor. Please contain your dependencies inside cloudprovider/hetzner. See Alibaba cloudprovider for reference. https://github.com/kubernetes/autoscaler/tree/master/cluster-autoscaler/cloudprovider/alicloud.

@Fgruntjes
Copy link
Contributor Author

We don't accept any new dependencies in vendor. Please contain your dependencies inside cloudprovider/hetzner. See Alibaba cloudprovider for reference. https://github.com/kubernetes/autoscaler/tree/master/cluster-autoscaler/cloudprovider/alicloud.

Thank you, solved that issue.

@MaciekPytel
Copy link
Contributor

Some high-level comments:

  • Unfortunately we can't accept any contribution until the CLA tests passes. It seems you may have already signed it?
  • We ask that any new provider has an OWNERS file with maintainers of that provider. With so many existing providers we're no longer able to maintain them.
  • It seems that hcloud-go is an inlined external client? If so feel free to exclude it from linter checks, etc - you can use PR CA: Skip huaweicloud sdk from verify scripts #3619 as an example.

/check-cla

@Fgruntjes
Copy link
Contributor Author

@MaciekPytel Thank you for the suggestions

Yes, I have signed it but somehow it is not recognizing I now updated our organization with the email domain and set it to public. Let's see if that's enough.

Will add the OWNERS and linter exclude.

/check-cla

@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: Fgruntjes
To complete the pull request process, please assign aleksandra-malinowska after the PR has been reviewed.
You can assign the PR to them by writing /assign @aleksandra-malinowska in a comment when ready.

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

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added do-not-merge/invalid-owners-file Indicates that a PR should not merge because it has an invalid OWNERS file in it. cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. and removed cncf-cla: no Indicates the PR's author has not signed the CNCF CLA. labels Oct 23, 2020
@Jeffwan
Copy link
Contributor

Jeffwan commented Oct 23, 2020

I feel like this is not a scalable way to manage all cloud providers in-tree now.
Do we want to onboard cloud provider owners on GRPC solution in the future? #3140

@alexanderkjeldaas
Copy link

@Jeffwan shouldn't the proposal in #3140 be merged, maybe with an example implementation, before blocking new implementations?

@Jeffwan
Copy link
Contributor

Jeffwan commented Oct 24, 2020

@alexanderkjeldaas Yeah, this PR should not be blocked for sure. Seems for the past half year, 2-3 cloud providers are added in the repo, I am thinking sig-autoscaler should prioritize pluggable solutions.

@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

The following users are mentioned in OWNERS file(s) but are untrusted for the following reasons. One way to make the user trusted is to add them as members of the kubernetes org. You can then trigger verification by writing /verify-owners in a comment.

  • Fgruntjes
    • User is not a member of the org. Satisfy at least one of these conditions to make the user trusted.
    • cluster-autoscaler/cloudprovider/hetzner/OWNERS

@niklaskorz
Copy link

I have written an alternative Hetzner autoscaler implementation we have been using successfully since April. Glad to see someone went through to open a pull request, I will have a look at your code and see if I can come up with any useful improvements before this is merged. :) @Fgruntjes

Copy link

@niklaskorz niklaskorz left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Really well done! Especially nice to see a fully working node group implementation, my own implementation was limitted to a single node group. I added a few comments, I hope they are helpful.

@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

@Fgruntjes: PR 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.

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Nov 28, 2020
@Bessonov
Copy link

Bessonov commented Jan 2, 2021

@mwielgus

We don't accept any new dependencies in vendor. Please contain your dependencies inside cloudprovider/hetzner. See Alibaba cloudprovider for reference. https://github.com/kubernetes/autoscaler/tree/master/cluster-autoscaler/cloudprovider/alicloud.

Is there any reason for that? How it's intended to be updated?

Fgruntjes and others added 3 commits January 11, 2021 15:01
Co-authored-by: Anton Bessonov <anton.bessonov.public@gmail.com>
…r.go

Co-authored-by: Niklas Korz <niklas@niklaskorz.de>
…r.go

Co-authored-by: Niklas Korz <niklas@niklaskorz.de>
@mwielgus
Copy link
Contributor

You are responsible for updating the dependencies once/if they are needed. We don't want to onboard any new libraries as they may have conflicting dependencies with other libraries. Imagine that both cloud provider A and B SDK requires library X. However A is only compatible with 1.0. B SDK has been migrated to 2.0. But Cluster Autoscaler still is on old B SDK with X in version 1.0. Now you want to update B due to security issues. How would you do that? There is no easy solution. You cannot kick out cloud provider A. You cannot have 2 libraries in the same binary. You have to upgrade B.
To avoid such problems we don't accept any dependencies of cloud providers. Everything needs to be contained in their directory. If this doesn't work for you, CA is open source and can be forked if needed :).

@mwielgus
Copy link
Contributor

Please resolve conflicts and squash commits to max 3 and we are good to go.

@LKaemmerling
Copy link
Contributor

Hello guys,

@Fgruntjes asked us (Hetzner Cloud Team) to take over this MR.

We (my colleague @fhofherr and I) want to take this over and further support it and also update everything in the future. So the plan was that we (@fhofherr and i (@LKaemmerling)) are set within the code owners file.

@Fgruntjes thank you again for the time you invested into this! You did a great job and we are really happy that we can take it over and make it officially supported by our team.

Thank you!

@Fgruntjes
Copy link
Contributor Author

@LKaemmerling thnx for your comment. Ill close this PR so you guys can create a new one to take over.

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/invalid-owners-file Indicates that a PR should not merge because it has an invalid OWNERS file in it. needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. size/XXL Denotes a PR that changes 1000+ lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

10 participants