-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 5.1k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Merge v1.2.1 master #1383
Merge v1.2.1 master #1383
Conversation
82ec07b
to
473374b
Compare
This is pretty much impossible to review due to the sheer number of lines changed. I suggest we merge and deal with any potential problems in master. If I remember our agreement correctly, we are going to do cherry-picking from release branches into master in the future. In that case, it's okay to not try to "save the merge" here and go with the cherry-picking solution already (which will presumably make future merges of the release branch into master harder, but we won't have to do that again). |
036f519
to
41ee82e
Compare
@containous/traefik your review is required to merge :) |
If the ECS cluster has > 100 tasks, passing them to ecs.DescribeTasksRequest() will result in the AWS API returning errors. This patch breaks them into chunks of at most 100, and calls DescribeTasks for each chunk. We also return early in case ListTasks returns no values; this prevents DescribeTasks from throwing HTTP errors.
Also improve documentation.
Required by go-github update.
This reverts commit 07db6a2.
Signed-off-by: Emile Vauge <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Emile Vauge <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Emile Vauge <[email protected]>
* Abort Kubernetes Ingress update if Kubernetes API call fails Currently if a Kubernetes API call fails we potentially remove a working service from Traefik. This changes it so if a Kubernetes API call fails we abort out of the ingress update and use the current working config. Github issue: #1240 Also added a test to cover when requested resources (services and endpoints) that the user has specified don’t exist. * Specifically capturing the tc range as documented here: https://blog.golang.org/subtests * Updating service names in the mock data to be more clear * Updated expected data to match what currently happens in the loadIngress * Adding a blank Servers to the expected output so we compare against that instead of nil. * Replacing the JSON test output with spew for the TestMissingResources test to help ensure we have useful output incase of failures * Adding a temporary fix to the GetEndoints mocked function so we can override the return value for if the endpoints exist. After the 1.2 release the use of properExists should be removed and the GetEndpoints function should return false for the second value indicating the endpoint doesn’t exist. However at this time that would break a lot of the tests. * Adding quick TODO line about removing the properExists property * Link to issue 1307 re: properExists flag.
* Added warning if network could not be found * Removed regex import from master * Corrected wrong function call
Signed-off-by: Emile Vauge <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Emile Vauge <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Emile Vauge <[email protected]>
Update tests too.
Signed-off-by: Emile Vauge <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Emile Vauge <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Emile Vauge <[email protected]>
41ee82e
to
aeb1718
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
410 files changed?
This PR merges v1.2.1 back into master.
There is an issue, commits from
Add v1.2 codename
toMerge pull request #1204 from containous/prepare-release-v1.2.0-rc2
should not be in this PR. Those are already in master thanks to #1208. It seems that the problem comes from PR #1208 where there is no merge commit and commit hashes are different 🤔So,1. either I leave it like this (with some duplicates in the history)2. either I can rebase interactively and drop commits fromAdd v1.2 codename
toMerge pull request #1204 from containous/prepare-release-v1.2.0-rc2
. The history will look better, but I fear that the next merge will end to the same issue :'(WDYT @containous/traefik ?Finally, what I did:
on branch
v1.2
,git rev-list --no-merges --reverse 9b24e13..fba3db5 > /tmp/rebase
: list all commits without merge commitsOn branch
merge-v1.2.1-master
(from master),cat /tmp/rebase | git cherry-pick --stdin