Skip to content
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

Revert "rebase: bump github.com/go-jose/go-jose/v3 from 3.0.1 to 3.0.3" #279

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

Rakshith-R
Copy link
Member

Reverts #270

This pr needs to be reverted for proper sync between DS devel and release-4.16 branch.

/cc @Madhu-1 @nixpanic

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot requested review from Madhu-1 and nixpanic March 27, 2024 08:57
Copy link

openshift-ci bot commented Mar 27, 2024

@Rakshith-R: No Bugzilla bug is referenced in the title of this pull request.
To reference a bug, add 'Bug XXX:' to the title of this pull request and request another bug refresh with /bugzilla refresh.

In response to this:

Revert "rebase: bump github.com/go-jose/go-jose/v3 from 3.0.1 to 3.0.3"

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository.

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the approved Its a good idea label Mar 27, 2024
@Madhu-1
Copy link
Member

Madhu-1 commented Mar 27, 2024

/lgtm

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the lgtm Code looks good label Mar 27, 2024
Copy link

openshift-ci bot commented Mar 27, 2024

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: Madhu-1, Rakshith-R

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

@nixpanic
Copy link
Member

/hold

I don't think reverting is nice. Better rebase a manual sync PR on top of latest release-4.16?

@Rakshith-R
Copy link
Member Author

/hold

I don't think reverting is nice. Better rebase a manual sync PR on top of latest release-4.16?

I think its better to have proper sequence of commits that doesn't deviate much.
and resolving manual conflicts may complicate things further.

@nixpanic
Copy link
Member

I think its better to have proper sequence of commits that doesn't deviate much.

This is normal with backports. Automation, or in this case we are expected to be able to handle this without issues.

openshift-merge-bot bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 27, 2024
Syncing red-hat-storage/ceph-csi:devel up to commit 28bc4d1.

Pull-Request #270 introduced a conflict that the resync automation job
could not address. This manual merge should make it possible for the
automation to continue again.

Closes: #279 #280
Signed-off-by: Niels de Vos <[email protected]>
@nixpanic
Copy link
Member

Addressed with #281.

@nixpanic nixpanic closed this Mar 27, 2024
@nixpanic nixpanic deleted the revert-270-ds/pr/269/release-4.16 branch April 4, 2024 10:09
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
approved Its a good idea do-not-merge/hold lgtm Code looks good
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants