[kubernetes/test-infra] Assign sigOwners to all remaining jobs (#5435)

[Aaron Crickenberger]

Fixes kubernetes/test-infra#5350

Broken into commit(s) per sig, with rationale in the commit message

I've removed UNKNOWN from validOwners to get CI to yell at me until I chase down the remaining jobs.

Currently the remaining jobs are related to:

• cadvisor (not even under the kuberntes org)
• heapster (which as I write this is probably sig-instrumentation, so I'll amend later)

@kubernetes/sig-api-machinery-test-failures
@kubernetes/sig-apps-test-failures
@kubernetes/sig-aws-test-failures
@kubernetes/sig-cli-test-failures
@kubernetes/sig-cluster-lifecycle-test-failures
@kubernetes/sig-gcp-test-failures
@kubernetes/sig-instrumentation-test-failures
@kubernetes/sig-node-test-failures
@kubernetes/sig-release-test-failures
@kubernetes/sig-scalability-test-failures
@kubernetes/sig-testing-test-failures
Please comment with suggestions for an alternate sig if you feel I have mis-assigned your sig

Does anyone know who should own the cadvisor jobs? Current guesses are sig-node or sig-instrumentation

---

You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at:

  https://github.com/kubernetes/test-infra/pull/5435

Commit Summary

• sig-api-machinery used to own Feature:GarbageCollector e2e's
• sig-api-machinery owns protobuf encoding/decoding
• sig-apps owns Feature:StatefulSet e2e's
• sig-apps owns charts
• sig-instrumentation owns the Feature:Stackdriver e2e's in k/k
• sig-instrumentation owns the Feature:Elasticsearch e2e's in k/k
• sig-gcp owns gci-gce and gci-gke jobs not using a specific feature
• sig-node owns cos-docker-validation jobs based on owning cosbeta jobs
• sig-release owns build jobs
• sig-cli owns sig-cli specific jobs
• sig-gcp owns presubmits too
• sig-aws owns kops build
• sig-cluster-lifecycle owns the Feature:EtcdUpgrade e2e's
• sig-cluster-lifecycle owns the Feature:HAMaster e2e's in k/k
• sig-apps owns the Feature:TaintEviction e2e's in k/k
• sig-scalability owns perf related jobs
• sig-testing is generating metrics
• sig-testing owns presubmit unit and verify jobs
• Remove UNKNOWN as a validOwner

File Changes

• M jobs/config.json (137)
• M jobs/validOwners.json (1)

Patch Links:

• https://github.com/kubernetes/test-infra/pull/5435.patch
• https://github.com/kubernetes/test-infra/pull/5435.diff

—
You are receiving this because you are on a team that was mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or mute the thread.

[k8s-ci-robot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: spiffxp
We suggest the following additional approver: ixdy

Assign the PR to them by writing /assign @ixdy in a comment when ready.

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

Needs approval from an approver in each of these OWNERS Files:

• OWNERS

You can indicate your approval by writing /approve in a comment
You can cancel your approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

[Aaron Crickenberger]

/area jobs

@kubernetes/sig-aws-misc you're lacking a test-failures team

[Benjamin Elder]

Remove UNKNOWN as a validOwner

🎉

[k8s-ci-robot]

@spiffxp: The following test failed, say /retest to rerun them all:

Test name	Commit	Details	Rerun command
pull-test-infra-bazel	7da8345	link	/test pull-test-infra-bazel

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard. Please help us cut down on flakes by linking to an open issue when you hit one in your PR.

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. I understand the commands that are listed here.

[Sen Lu]

@krzyzacy commented on this pull request.

---

In jobs/validOwners.json:

> @@ -1,5 +1,4 @@
 [
-   "UNKNOWN",

❤️

[Sen Lu]

looks like there are cadvisor and heapster jobs left, otherwise

[Robert Bailey]

@roberthbailey commented on this pull request.

---

In jobs/config.json:

> @@ -1849,7 +1849,7 @@
     ],
     "scenario": "kubernetes_e2e",
     "sigOwners": [
-      "UNKNOWN"
+      "sig-cluster-lifecycle"

We talked about etcd ownership a bit during the most recent cluster lifecycle meeting and the only consensus was that it didn't have clear ownership. I'm not sure anyone in our sig wants to sign up to own this job atm, but I also don't know who else would own it. It was created by sig-scalability because they were driving the etcd2 --> etcd3 migration. But other than that no sig seems to be owning etcd versioning.

[Daniel Smith]

api machinery owns making sure etcd works, if not also the rollout.

On Thu, Nov 9, 2017 at 9:27 PM, Robert Bailey <notifi...@github.com>
wrote:

> *@roberthbailey* commented on this pull request.
> ------------------------------
>
> In jobs/config.json
> <https://github.com/kubernetes/test-infra/pull/5435#discussion_r150156626>

> :
>
> > @@ -1849,7 +1849,7 @@
> ],
> "scenario": "kubernetes_e2e",
> "sigOwners": [
> - "UNKNOWN"
> + "sig-cluster-lifecycle"
>
> We talked about etcd ownership a bit during the most recent cluster
> lifecycle meeting and the only consensus was that it didn't have clear
> ownership. I'm not sure anyone in our sig wants to sign up to own this job
> atm, but I also don't know who else would own it. It was created by
> sig-scalability because they were driving the etcd2 --> etcd3 migration.
> But other than that no sig seems to be owning etcd versioning.
>
> —

> You are receiving this because you are on a team that was mentioned.
> Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub

> <https://github.com/kubernetes/test-infra/pull/5435#pullrequestreview-75666080>,
> or mute the thread
> <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAngltKv0pXdYQck4EpRwtQJVo08sHuMks5s0968gaJpZM4QY7Ai>
> .

[Benjamin Elder]

@BenTheElder commented on this pull request.

---

In jobs/config.json:

> @@ -9455,7 +9456,7 @@
     ],
     "scenario": "kubernetes_verify",
     "sigOwners": [
-      "UNKNOWN"
+      "sig-testing"

I still very much dislike this job very much but it does seem sig-testing owns it 😂
/shrug

[Benjamin Elder]

@BenTheElder commented on this pull request.

---

In jobs/config.json:

> @@ -9455,7 +9456,7 @@
     ],
     "scenario": "kubernetes_verify",
     "sigOwners": [
-      "UNKNOWN"
+      "sig-testing"

in fact every job using the kubernetes_verify is a pile of dirty hacks owned by sig-testing 🤷‍♂️

[Benjamin Elder]

seconding once cadvisor and heapster jobs are sorted 👍
/approve

[k8s-ci-robot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: BenTheElder, spiffxp

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

Needs approval from an approver in each of these OWNERS Files:

• OWNERS [BenTheElder]

You can indicate your approval by writing /approve in a comment
You can cancel your approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

—

[Aaron Crickenberger]

@lavalamp @roberthbailey I assigned sig-cluster-lifecycle to the ci-kubernetes-e2e-gce-gci-latest-rollback-etcd job because it uses the Feature:EtcdUpgrade tag which shows up here: https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/blob/master/test/e2e/lifecycle/cluster_upgrade.go#L179-L202

Last time I raised etcd2 vs. etcd3 or etcd2->etcd3 I also walked away feeling like sig-api-machinery owns all things registry-and-thus-etcd-related. But the test codebase today doesn't reflect this. I'd rather document the state of today and ask that you open an issue if you'd like to move it to test/e2e/apimachinery.

We've still got lingering etcd2 jobs that I would like a sole sig to decide the fate of, but that's outside the scope of this PR.

[Aaron Crickenberger]

@spiffxp pushed 2 commits.

• 68df525 sig-node owns cadvisor-related jobs
• ff4c3df sig-instrumentation owns heapster-related jobs

—
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
View it on GitHub or mute the thread.

[Aaron Crickenberger]

/hold
for comment

@kubernetes/sig-node-test-failures I'm guessing you own cadvisor-related jobs
@kubernetes/sig-instrumentation-test-failures I'm guess you own heapster-related jobs

[Robert Bailey]

@krousey -- I was under the impression that the framework was just that; a framework to do the upgrades. Did we special case etcd upgrade testing?

[Michael Taufen]

@mtaufen commented on this pull request.

---

In jobs/validOwners.json:

> @@ -1,5 +1,4 @@
 [
-   "UNKNOWN",

💯

[Michael Taufen]

SO great to see this come full circle! Thanks Aaron!

[krousey]

@roberthbailey We (and by we I mean @mml) special cased the etcd upgrade testing. In this "upgrade" test, the version remains the same, only etcd is switched out. It required a different disruption logic, that's why it was specialized. Aside from the disruption function and the list of tests it runs, it re-uses the framework.

[Aaron Crickenberger]

/hold cancel
This might not be the 100% perfect totally accurate mapping of sigs to jobs, but it's something we can iterate on. Leaving all the individual commits vs. squashing for ease of revert if we need to down the line.

[Benjamin Elder]

/lgtm

Corrections to ownership can be addressed in follow up discussion / PRs, thanks for tackling this @spiffxp! 😄

[k8s-ci-robot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: BenTheElder, spiffxp

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

Needs approval from an approver in each of these OWNERS Files:

• OWNERS [BenTheElder]

You can indicate your approval by writing /approve in a comment
You can cancel your approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

—

[k8s-ci-robot]

Merged #5435.