Note: This bug is displayed in read-only format because the product is no longer active in Red Hat Bugzilla.

Bug 1756132

Summary:	New IngressController operator API field incorrectly marked optional in OpenAPI spec
Product:	OpenShift Container Platform	Reporter:	Dan Mace <dmace>
Component:	Networking	Assignee:	Dan Mace <dmace>
Networking sub component:	router	QA Contact:	Hongan Li <hongli>
Status:	CLOSED ERRATA	Docs Contact:
Severity:	urgent
Priority:	urgent	CC:	aos-bugs, ccoleman, deads
Version:	4.2.0
Target Milestone:	---
Target Release:	4.3.0
Hardware:	Unspecified
OS:	Unspecified
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:		Doc Type:	If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:
Clones:	1756141 (view as bug list)		Environment:
Last Closed:	2020-05-13 21:25:33 UTC	Type:	Bug
Regression:	---	Mount Type:	---
Documentation:	---	CRM:
Verified Versions:		Category:	---
oVirt Team:	---	RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team:	---	Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:
Bug Depends On:
Bug Blocks:	1756141

Description Dan Mace 2019-09-26 20:16:26 UTC

Description of problem:

There's a new field on the ingresscontroller API, `scope`:

https://github.com/openshift/cluster-ingress-operator/blob/release-4.2/manifests/00-custom-resource-definition.yaml#L450

The field is specified as required. This is an additive change to the v1 API, so the field _must_ be optional.

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):


How reproducible:


Steps to Reproduce:
1.
2.
3.

Actual results:


Expected results:


Additional info:

Comment 1 Dan Mace 2019-09-26 20:35:41 UTC

I got it backwards: loadBalancer the struct is a new field that contains scope, and loadBalancer is optional (correct). loadBalancer.scope _should_ be required.

The openshift/api Go type is actually incorrect in that it marks scope optional. This needs fixed.

Due to a coincidence, the ingress operator actually ignores the +optional tag and so the CRD in 4.2 is already correct and doesn't need fixed. The generator is fixed in 4.3 and there's no reason to backport the changes yet.

Comment 4 Hongan Li 2019-10-10 03:51:00 UTC

verified with 4.3.0-0.ci-2019-10-09-222432

Comment 6 errata-xmlrpc 2020-05-13 21:25:33 UTC

Since the problem described in this bug report should be
resolved in a recent advisory, it has been closed with a
resolution of ERRATA.

For information on the advisory, and where to find the updated
files, follow the link below.

If the solution does not work for you, open a new bug report.

https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2020:0062