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

build: always generate fresh bundle #176

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Apr 29, 2022

Conversation

iamniting
Copy link
Member

operator-sdk does not delete unnecessary files while generating
a bundle, It just overwrites the required ones and we end up having
resources which is not required anymore. Resolve the same via removing
the bundle directory before generating a bundle.

Signed-off-by: Nitin Goyal nigoyal@redhat.com

operator-sdk does not delete unnecessary files while generating
a bundle, It just overwrites the required ones and we end up having
resources which is not required anymore. Resolve the same via removing
the bundle directory before generating a bundle.

Signed-off-by: Nitin Goyal <nigoyal@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Nitin Goyal <nigoyal@redhat.com>
@iamniting
Copy link
Member Author

Outputs after my testing

NAME                  DISPLAY            VERSION   REPLACES   PHASE
lvm-operator.v0.0.1   ODF LVM Operator   0.0.1                Succeeded
NAME                                              READY   STATUS    RESTARTS   AGE
lvm-operator-controller-manager-96465645f-xmdfp   3/3     Running   0          2m26s
topolvm-controller-69ddd6bdff-qx7hz               4/4     Running   0          102s
topolvm-node-jqdms                                4/4     Running   0          102s
vg-manager-lfq9c                                  1/1     Running   0          102s
NAME            STATUS   VOLUME                                     CAPACITY   ACCESS MODES   STORAGECLASS   AGE
lvm-block-pvc   Bound    pvc-804cefc9-da3d-457d-befb-5d7d7ac911f5   5Gi        RWO            odf-lvm-vg1    10s
lvm-file-pvc    Bound    pvc-a20dafe9-1db7-48b4-8bb5-9951bad5c98b   5Gi        RWO            odf-lvm-vg1    11s

@iamniting
Copy link
Member Author

/hold

@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 Apr 27, 2022
Copy link
Contributor

@leelavg leelavg left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

lgtm but why on hold?

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Apr 28, 2022
@iamniting
Copy link
Member Author

lgtm but why on hold?

I wanted to test this again after cleaning up all resources which OLM does not clean up. and it is working properly.

/hold cancel

@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 Apr 28, 2022
@iamniting iamniting requested a review from nbalacha April 29, 2022 09:38
@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Apr 29, 2022

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: iamniting, leelavg, nbalacha

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 Apr 29, 2022
@openshift-merge-robot openshift-merge-robot merged commit 321e393 into openshift:main Apr 29, 2022
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.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants