Automatic merge from submit-queue
Curating Owners: pkg/controller
cc @jsafrane @mikedanese @bprashanth @derekwaynecarr @thockin @saad-ali
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
perfectly: 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.
## 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 add
the names of people that should be reviewing code in the future in the **reviewers** section. You probably do NOT need to modify the **approvers** section.
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)
Automatic merge from submit-queue
the observed usage should match those that have hard constraints
in the sync process, the quota will be replenished, the new observed usage will be sumed from each evaluator, if the previousUsed set is not be cleared, the new usage will be dirty, maybe some unusage resource still in , as the code below
newUsage = quota.Mask(newUsage, matchedResources)
for key, value := range newUsage {
usage.Status.Used[key] = value
}
so i think here shoul not set value previousUsed
<!-- Reviewable:start -->
---
This change is [<img src="https://reviewable.kubernetes.io/review_button.svg" height="34" align="absmiddle" alt="Reviewable"/>](https://reviewable.kubernetes.io/reviews/kubernetes/kubernetes/29653)
<!-- Reviewable:end -->
