Bug 1811653 - OB/OBC CRD not marked as Internal
Summary: OB/OBC CRD not marked as Internal
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED DUPLICATE of bug 1798571
Alias: None
Product: Red Hat OpenShift Container Storage
Classification: Red Hat Storage
Component: ocs-operator
Version: 4.3
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
medium
medium
Target Milestone: ---
: ---
Assignee: umanga
QA Contact: Raz Tamir
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2020-03-09 13:29 UTC by umanga
Modified: 2020-04-13 12:37 UTC (History)
5 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2020-03-11 18:44:59 UTC
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)


Links
System ID Private Priority Status Summary Last Updated
Github openshift ocs-operator pull 439 0 None closed Bug 1798571: OB/OBC CRD not marked as Internal 2020-06-30 12:01:06 UTC

Description umanga 2020-03-09 13:29:46 UTC
Description of problem (please be detailed as possible and provide log
snippests):
OB and OBC CRD is not being marked as Internal after moving it from `Required` to `Owned`.

Version of all relevant components (if applicable):
OCS 4.3
OCP 4.4

Does this issue impact your ability to continue to work with the product
(please explain in detail what is the user impact)?
No. But impacts UI.

Is there any workaround available to the best of your knowledge?
No

Rate from 1 - 5 the complexity of the scenario you performed that caused this
bug (1 - very simple, 5 - very complex)?
1

Can this issue reproducible?
Yes

Can this issue reproduce from the UI?
Yes

If this is a regression, please provide more details to justify this:
Yes. This happened after moving OB/OBC CRDs to `Owned`

Steps to Reproduce:
1. Install OCS 4.3
2. Go to Operator Details Page
3. 


Actual results:
OB/OBC are exposed as Provided APIs to user

Expected results:

OB/OBC should not be exposed to user
Additional info:

Comment 4 Jose A. Rivera 2020-03-09 13:50:49 UTC
Technically not a regression, since it was never fixed. Still, ACKed.

Comment 8 Michael Adam 2020-03-11 18:43:35 UTC
I don't understand that this is closed as duplicate.
This depends on the patch in Bug #1798571, but it's dealing with a separate aspect.
So we should either merge the PRs or keep separate BZs...

Comment 9 Michael Adam 2020-03-11 18:44:59 UTC
Sorry, re-opened it by accident. Bugzilla is behaving strangely.

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 1798571 ***

Comment 10 umanga 2020-03-12 06:47:25 UTC
(In reply to Michael Adam from comment #8)
> I don't understand that this is closed as duplicate.
> This depends on the patch in Bug #1798571, but it's dealing with a separate
> aspect.
> So we should either merge the PRs or keep separate BZs...

If both fixes are done in Bug #1798571, this bug won't even come.
Since the bug source is same even if there are 2 fixes, I marked this as duplicate.


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.