Clean up manifests#510
Conversation
|
/assign @terrytangyuan |
|
@terrytangyuan Or we push the latest image with mpi-operator/.github/workflows/mpi-operator-docker-image-publish.yml Lines 29 to 33 in 05ac6ad cc: @alculquicondor Updated I modified the CI to push the latest image with the |
d38ff6b to
df5496b
Compare
| type=ref,event=pr | ||
| type=semver,pattern={{version}} | ||
| type=semver,pattern={{major}}.{{minor}} | ||
| type=raw,latest |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
but wouldn't this affect every tag?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Does that mean the existing latest tag image is overwritten?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
IIUC, by doing this the latest tag would always be overriden with every push. I think we should do this manually for new releases only.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Makes sense. What do you think about replacing the image tag with master in the following to avoid this confusing?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
that sounds better to me.
The manifests that are part of a release should have the specific release tag.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Sounds good. I would update this PR.
df5496b to
77989c6
Compare
|
@alculquicondor Updated. |
|
Can we update https://github.com/kubeflow/mpi-operator#installation to indicate that this will install the latest development version?
|
Makes sense. It is helpful. |
77989c6 to
1f4c681
Compare
|
@alculquicondor I updated the docs. |
| git clone https://github.com/kubeflow/mpi-operator | ||
| cd mpi-operator | ||
| kubectl apply -f deploy/v2beta1/mpi-operator.yaml | ||
| kubectl apply -f https://raw.githubusercontent.com/kubeflow/mpi-operator/master/deploy/v2beta1/mpi-operator.yaml |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
this file still says latest actually
mpi-operator/deploy/v2beta1/mpi-operator.yaml
Line 483 in 382da78
regenerate the file
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I plan to generate that manifest in #509.
Do you prefer to regenerate the manifests in this PR?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Sure. I close #508 and regenerate manifests in this PR.
1f4c681 to
f30ee74
Compare
f30ee74 to
8df35aa
Compare
| - name: generate codes | ||
| run: make verify-generate |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
As discussed in #509 (review), we verify generated codes.
Makefile
Outdated
| $(GOLANGCI_LINT) run --new-from-rev=origin/master --go 1.19 | ||
|
|
||
| # Generate deploy/v2beta1/mpi-operator.yaml | ||
| all-in-one: kustomize crd |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
all-in-one sounds very cryptic. What about manifest
| plural: mpijobs | ||
| shortNames: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
should we add the shortname via kubebuilder markers? https://book.kubebuilder.io/reference/markers/crd.html
I say no, given that these names are too short to be meaningful
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I agree with you. I also think we don't need these shortNames.
Let me know what other members think.
cc: @terrytangyuan
| type: object | ||
| required: | ||
| - Launcher | ||
| additionalProperties: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We are losing the knowledge about Launcher and Worker here.
But this is a problem with the API structs themselves.
We shouldn't be using a map https://github.com/kubernetes/community/blob/master/contributors/devel/sig-architecture/api-conventions.md#lists-of-named-subobjects-preferred-over-maps
Maybe we can fix it in a v2(beta2) API, but it would be nice to fix other training job objects, like so:
type MPIReplicaSpecs struct {
Launcher common.ReplicaSpec `json:"launcher"`
Worker common.ReplicaSpec `json:"worker"`
}There was a problem hiding this comment.
Looks good.
IIRC, we plan to remove dependencies with kubeflow/common in the future altogether.
So we will be able to fix this after that.
Either way, I create an issue to keep tracking this.
f9589f8 to
a1d0bf9
Compare
|
@alculquicondor This PR is ready for review. PTAL. |
| // initializeMPIJobStatuses initializes the ReplicaStatuses for MPIJob. | ||
| func initializeMPIJobStatuses(mpiJob *kubeflow.MPIJob, mtype kubeflow.MPIReplicaType) { | ||
| replicaType := kubeflow.MPIReplicaType(mtype) | ||
| replicaType := mtype |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
just remove this line?
Signed-off-by: Yuki Iwai <yuki.iwai.tz@gmail.com>
a1d0bf9 to
37967bc
Compare
|
Addressed comments and squashed commits into one. |
|
/lgtm |
|
/assign @terrytangyuan |
|
@terrytangyuan Can you add a approve label to this PR? We need this improvement for the v0.4.0 release. |
|
Let me try my new powers 😂 /approve |
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: alculquicondor The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. The pull request process is described here DetailsNeeds approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
Great power 🚀 |
Signed-off-by: Yuki Iwai yuki.iwai.tz@gmail.com
I cleaned up manifests in the following:
make crdtarget so that we can add the latest CRD to the manifests directory.deploy/v2beta1/mpi-operator.yaml.Our operator images at dockerhub:
latest: https://hub.docker.com/layers/mpioperator/mpi-operator/latest/images/sha256-3ccfa8d8b7bf97836b291f5cadb39afec4b3612acddb4a5f81ecccdfaede92f9?context=exploremaster: https://hub.docker.com/layers/mpioperator/mpi-operator/master/images/sha256-84749d84196f15fa61b2a2786ae625b4b85dd750dd4dd5e39970d4985ebfc70a?context=exploreFixes: #508