Add PriorityClass to pkg/registry
Add PriorityClass to pkg/master/master.go
Add PriorityClass to import_know_versions.go
Update linted packages
minor fix
Automatic merge from submit-queue
remove some people from OWNERS so they don't get reviews anymore
These are googlers who don't work on the project anymore but are still
getting reviews assigned to them:
- @bprashanth
- @rjnagal
- @vmarmol
Automatic merge from submit-queue
Updated comments of func in testapi.
**Which issue this PR fixes** *(optional, in `fixes #<issue number>(, fixes #<issue_number>, ...)` format, will close that issue when PR gets merged)*: fixes #N/A
**Special notes for your reviewer**:
**Release note**:
```release-note-none
```
To properly register the types in the admission API group we need to
create an "install" package and wire it up. This is required by the
webhook admission controller being developed as part of
https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/132
export functions from pkg/api/validation
add settings API
add settings to pkg/registry
add settings api to pkg/master/master.go
add admission control plugin for pod preset
add new admission control plugin to kube-apiserver
add settings to import_known_versions.go
add settings to codegen
add validation tests
add settings to client generation
add protobufs generation for settings api
update linted packages
add settings to testapi
add settings install to clientset
add start of e2e
add pod preset plugin to config-test.sh
Signed-off-by: Jess Frazelle <acidburn@google.com>
Automatic merge from submit-queue
Curating Owners: pkg/api
cc @lavalamp @smarterclayton @erictune @thockin @bgrant0607
In an effort to expand the existing pool of reviewers and establish a
two-tiered review process (first someone lgtms and then someone
experienced in the project approves), we are adding new reviewers to
existing owners files.
If You Care About the Process:
------------------------------
We did this by algorithmically figuring out who’s contributed code to
the project and in what directories. Unfortunately, that doesn’t work
well: people that have made mechanical code changes (e.g change the
copyright header across all directories) end up as reviewers in lots of
places.
Instead of using pure commit data, we generated an excessively large
list of reviewers and pruned based on all time commit data, recent
commit data and review data (number of PRs commented on).
At this point we have a decent list of reviewers, but it needs one last
pass for fine tuning.
Also, see https://github.com/kubernetes/contrib/issues/1389.
TLDR:
-----
As an owner of a sig/directory and a leader of the project, here’s what
we need from you:
1. Use PR https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/pull/35715 as an example.
2. The pull-request is made editable, please edit the `OWNERS` file to
remove the names of people that shouldn't be reviewing code in the
future in the **reviewers** section. You probably do NOT need to modify
the **approvers** section. Names asre sorted by relevance, using some
secret statistics.
3. Notify me if you want some OWNERS file to be removed. Being an
approver or reviewer of a parent directory makes you a reviewer/approver
of the subdirectories too, so not all OWNERS files may be necessary.
4. Please use ALIAS if you want to use the same list of people over and
over again (don't hesitate to ask me for help, or use the pull-request
above as an example)
Alter how runtime.SerializeInfo is represented to simplify negotiation
and reduce the need to allocate during negotiation. Simplify the dynamic
client's logic around negotiating type. Add more tests for media type
handling where necessary.
Automatic merge from submit-queue
Centralize install code
Trying to figure out a way to do this that makes the changes as painless to roll out as possible. This is going to be a multi-step process...
Convert single GV and lists of GVs into an interface that can handle
more complex scenarios (everything internal, nothing supported). Pass
the interface down into conversion.
