Skip to content

Conversation

openshift-bot
Copy link

@openshift-bot openshift-bot commented Sep 6, 2025

Updating kube-rbac-proxy-container image to be consistent with ART for 4.21
TLDR:
Product builds by ART can be configured for different base and builder images than corresponding CI
builds. This automated PR requests a change to CI configuration to align with ART's configuration;
please take steps to merge it quickly or contact ART to coordinate changes.

The configuration in the following ART component metadata is driving this alignment request:
kube-rbac-proxy.yml.

Detail:

This repository is out of sync with the downstream product builds for this component. The CI
configuration for at least one image differs from ART's expected product configuration. This should
be addressed to ensure that the component's CI testing accurate reflects what customers will
experience.

Most of these PRs are opened as an ART-driven proposal to migrate base image or builder(s) to a
different version, usually prior to GA. The intent is to effect changes in both configurations
simultaneously without breaking either CI or ART builds, so usually ART builds are configured to
consider CI as canonical and attempt to match CI config until the PR merges to align both. ART may
also configure changes in GA releases with CI remaining canonical for a brief grace period to enable
CI to succeed and the alignment PR to merge. In either case, ART configuration will be made
canonical at some point (typically at branch-cut before GA or release dev-cut after GA), so it is
important to align CI configuration as soon as possible.

PRs are also triggered when CI configuration changes without ART coordination, for instance to
change the number of builder images or to use a different golang version. These changes should be
coordinated with ART; whether ART configuration is canonical or not, preferably it would be updated
first to enable the changes to occur simultaneously in both CI and ART at the same time. This also
gives ART a chance to validate the intended changes first. For instance, ART compiles most
components with the Golang version being used by the control plane for a given OpenShift release.
Exceptions to this convention (i.e. you believe your component must be compiled with a Golang
version independent from the control plane) must be granted by the OpenShift staff engineers and
communicated to the ART team.

Roles & Responsibilities:

  • Component owners are responsible for ensuring these alignment PRs merge with passing
    tests OR that necessary metadata changes are reported to the ART team: @release-artists
    in #forum-ocp-art on Slack. If necessary, the changes required by this pull request can be
    introduced with a separate PR opened by the component team. Once the repository is aligned,
    this PR will be closed automatically.
  • In particular, it could be that a job like verify-deps is complaining. In that case, please open
    a new PR with the dependency issues addressed (and base images bumped). ART-9595 for reference.
  • Patch-manager or those with sufficient privileges within this repository may add
    any required labels to ensure the PR merges once tests are passing. In cases where ART config is
    canonical, downstream builds are already being built with these changes, and merging this PR
    only improves the fidelity of our CI. In cases where ART config is not canonical, this provides
    a grace period for the component team to align their CI with ART's configuration before it becomes
    canonical in product builds.

ART has been configured to reconcile your CI build root image (see https://docs.ci.openshift.org/docs/architecture/ci-operator/#build-root-image).
In order for your upstream .ci-operator.yaml configuration to be honored, you must set the following in your openshift/release ci-operator configuration file:

build_root:
  from_repository: true

Change behavior of future PRs:

  • In case you just want to follow the base images that ART suggests, you can configure additional labels to be
    set up automatically. This means that such a PR would merge without human intervention (and awareness!) in the future.
    To do so, open a PR to set the auto_label attribute in the image configuration. Example
  • You can set a commit prefix, like UPSTREAM: <carry>: . An example.

If you have any questions about this pull request, please reach out to @release-artists in the #forum-ocp-art coreos slack channel.

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Author

@openshift-bot openshift-bot added the jira/valid-bug Indicates that a referenced Jira bug is valid for the branch this PR is targeting. label Sep 6, 2025
Copy link

coderabbitai bot commented Sep 6, 2025

Walkthrough

Bumped OpenShift-related image tags from 4.20 to 4.21 in CI and Docker build files. Added two LABEL entries (summary, maintainer) to the Dockerfile. No logic, code, or public API changes.

Changes

Cohort / File(s) Summary of Changes
CI configuration
./.ci-operator.yaml
Updated build_root_image.tag from rhel-9-release-golang-1.24-openshift-4.20 to rhel-9-release-golang-1.24-openshift-4.21; no other fields changed.
Container image build
./Dockerfile.ocp
Updated OpenShift builder and base images from 4.20 to 4.21; added LABELs: summary (empty) and maintainer (OpenShift Monitoring Team [email protected]).

Estimated code review effort

🎯 2 (Simple) | ⏱️ ~10 minutes

✨ Finishing Touches
🧪 Generate unit tests
  • Create PR with unit tests
  • Post copyable unit tests in a comment

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot requested review from ibihim and liouk September 6, 2025 05:04
Copy link

openshift-ci bot commented Sep 6, 2025

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: openshift-bot
Once this PR has been reviewed and has the lgtm label, please assign ibihim for approval. For more information see the Code Review Process.

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

Copy link

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Actionable comments posted: 0

🧹 Nitpick comments (2)
Dockerfile.ocp (2)

10-10: Base image bumped to 4.21 — consider digest pinning.

LGTM functionally. For supply-chain reproducibility, pin to a digest to avoid tag drift.

Example (replace placeholder digest):

-FROM registry.ci.openshift.org/ocp/4.21:base-rhel9
+FROM registry.ci.openshift.org/ocp/4.21:base-rhel9@sha256:<DIGEST>

14-15: Fill in summary and add OCI-standard labels (keep existing for backward compat).

Empty summary isn’t helpful, and “maintainer” is non-OCI. Add org.opencontainers.image.* while preserving current labels.

 LABEL io.k8s.display-name="kube-rbac-proxy" \
       io.k8s.description="This is a proxy, that can perform Kubernetes RBAC authorization." \
       io.openshift.tags="openshift,kubernetes" \
-      summary="" \
-      maintainer="OpenShift Monitoring Team <[email protected]>"
+      summary="Kubernetes RBAC-authorizing reverse proxy for securing endpoints." \
+      maintainer="OpenShift Monitoring Team <[email protected]>" \
+      org.opencontainers.image.title="kube-rbac-proxy" \
+      org.opencontainers.image.description="A reverse proxy that performs Kubernetes RBAC authorization." \
+      org.opencontainers.image.authors="OpenShift Monitoring Team <[email protected]>" \
+      org.opencontainers.image.source="https://github.com/openshift/kube-rbac-proxy" \
+      org.opencontainers.image.vendor="Red Hat, Inc."

(Optional: add org.opencontainers.image.revision via build arg if desired.)

📜 Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

Cache: Disabled due to data retention organization setting

Knowledge Base: Disabled due to Reviews > Disable Knowledge Base setting

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between b913435 and 93afe4a.

📒 Files selected for processing (2)
  • .ci-operator.yaml (1 hunks)
  • Dockerfile.ocp (2 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (2)
Dockerfile.ocp (1)

1-1: Builder image bumped to 4.21 — looks good.

Matches the CI build root change; no issues spotted.

.ci-operator.yaml (1)

4-4: Build root tag aligned to 4.21 — verify openshift/release config honors from_repository.

Change looks correct. Please ensure the openshift/release ci-operator config for this repo/branch sets:
build_root:
from_repository: true
so this .ci-operator.yaml is authoritative.

Copy link

openshift-ci bot commented Sep 6, 2025

@openshift-bot: all tests passed!

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard.

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-sigs/prow repository. I understand the commands that are listed here.

@openshift-bot openshift-bot added the verified Signifies that the PR passed pre-merge verification criteria label Sep 26, 2025
@openshift-bot openshift-bot changed the title Updating kube-rbac-proxy-container image to be consistent with ART for 4.21 OCPBUGS-62563: Updating kube-rbac-proxy-container image to be consistent with ART for 4.21 Oct 1, 2025
@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the jira/valid-reference Indicates that this PR references a valid Jira ticket of any type. label Oct 1, 2025
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link

@openshift-bot: This pull request references Jira Issue OCPBUGS-62563, which is valid. The bug has been moved to the POST state.

3 validation(s) were run on this bug
  • bug is open, matching expected state (open)
  • bug target version (4.21.0) matches configured target version for branch (4.21.0)
  • bug is in the state New, which is one of the valid states (NEW, ASSIGNED, POST)

Requesting review from QA contact:
/cc @xingxingxia

The bug has been updated to refer to the pull request using the external bug tracker.

In response to this:

Updating kube-rbac-proxy-container image to be consistent with ART for 4.21
TLDR:
Product builds by ART can be configured for different base and builder images than corresponding CI
builds. This automated PR requests a change to CI configuration to align with ART's configuration;
please take steps to merge it quickly or contact ART to coordinate changes.

The configuration in the following ART component metadata is driving this alignment request:
kube-rbac-proxy.yml.

Detail:

This repository is out of sync with the downstream product builds for this component. The CI
configuration for at least one image differs from ART's expected product configuration. This should
be addressed to ensure that the component's CI testing accurate reflects what customers will
experience.

Most of these PRs are opened as an ART-driven proposal to migrate base image or builder(s) to a
different version, usually prior to GA. The intent is to effect changes in both configurations
simultaneously without breaking either CI or ART builds, so usually ART builds are configured to
consider CI as canonical and attempt to match CI config until the PR merges to align both. ART may
also configure changes in GA releases with CI remaining canonical for a brief grace period to enable
CI to succeed and the alignment PR to merge. In either case, ART configuration will be made
canonical at some point (typically at branch-cut before GA or release dev-cut after GA), so it is
important to align CI configuration as soon as possible.

PRs are also triggered when CI configuration changes without ART coordination, for instance to
change the number of builder images or to use a different golang version. These changes should be
coordinated with ART; whether ART configuration is canonical or not, preferably it would be updated
first to enable the changes to occur simultaneously in both CI and ART at the same time. This also
gives ART a chance to validate the intended changes first. For instance, ART compiles most
components with the Golang version being used by the control plane for a given OpenShift release.
Exceptions to this convention (i.e. you believe your component must be compiled with a Golang
version independent from the control plane) must be granted by the OpenShift staff engineers and
communicated to the ART team.

Roles & Responsibilities:

  • Component owners are responsible for ensuring these alignment PRs merge with passing
    tests OR that necessary metadata changes are reported to the ART team: @release-artists
    in #forum-ocp-art on Slack. If necessary, the changes required by this pull request can be
    introduced with a separate PR opened by the component team. Once the repository is aligned,
    this PR will be closed automatically.
  • In particular, it could be that a job like verify-deps is complaining. In that case, please open
    a new PR with the dependency issues addressed (and base images bumped). ART-9595 for reference.
  • Patch-manager or those with sufficient privileges within this repository may add
    any required labels to ensure the PR merges once tests are passing. In cases where ART config is
    canonical, downstream builds are already being built with these changes, and merging this PR
    only improves the fidelity of our CI. In cases where ART config is not canonical, this provides
    a grace period for the component team to align their CI with ART's configuration before it becomes
    canonical in product builds.

ART has been configured to reconcile your CI build root image (see https://docs.ci.openshift.org/docs/architecture/ci-operator/#build-root-image).
In order for your upstream .ci-operator.yaml configuration to be honored, you must set the following in your openshift/release ci-operator configuration file:

build_root:
 from_repository: true

Change behavior of future PRs:

  • In case you just want to follow the base images that ART suggests, you can configure additional labels to be
    set up automatically. This means that such a PR would merge without human intervention (and awareness!) in the future.
    To do so, open a PR to set the auto_label attribute in the image configuration. Example
  • You can set a commit prefix, like UPSTREAM: <carry>: . An example.

If you have any questions about this pull request, please reach out to @release-artists in the #forum-ocp-art coreos slack channel.

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 openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository.

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot requested a review from xingxingxia October 1, 2025 02:32
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link

openshift-ci-robot commented Oct 1, 2025

@openshift-bot: This pull request references Jira Issue OCPBUGS-62563, which is valid.

3 validation(s) were run on this bug
  • bug is open, matching expected state (open)
  • bug target version (4.21.0) matches configured target version for branch (4.21.0)
  • bug is in the state POST, which is one of the valid states (NEW, ASSIGNED, POST)

Requesting review from QA contact:
/cc @xingxingxia

In response to this:

Updating kube-rbac-proxy-container image to be consistent with ART for 4.21
TLDR:
Product builds by ART can be configured for different base and builder images than corresponding CI
builds. This automated PR requests a change to CI configuration to align with ART's configuration;
please take steps to merge it quickly or contact ART to coordinate changes.

The configuration in the following ART component metadata is driving this alignment request:
kube-rbac-proxy.yml.

Detail:

This repository is out of sync with the downstream product builds for this component. The CI
configuration for at least one image differs from ART's expected product configuration. This should
be addressed to ensure that the component's CI testing accurate reflects what customers will
experience.

Most of these PRs are opened as an ART-driven proposal to migrate base image or builder(s) to a
different version, usually prior to GA. The intent is to effect changes in both configurations
simultaneously without breaking either CI or ART builds, so usually ART builds are configured to
consider CI as canonical and attempt to match CI config until the PR merges to align both. ART may
also configure changes in GA releases with CI remaining canonical for a brief grace period to enable
CI to succeed and the alignment PR to merge. In either case, ART configuration will be made
canonical at some point (typically at branch-cut before GA or release dev-cut after GA), so it is
important to align CI configuration as soon as possible.

PRs are also triggered when CI configuration changes without ART coordination, for instance to
change the number of builder images or to use a different golang version. These changes should be
coordinated with ART; whether ART configuration is canonical or not, preferably it would be updated
first to enable the changes to occur simultaneously in both CI and ART at the same time. This also
gives ART a chance to validate the intended changes first. For instance, ART compiles most
components with the Golang version being used by the control plane for a given OpenShift release.
Exceptions to this convention (i.e. you believe your component must be compiled with a Golang
version independent from the control plane) must be granted by the OpenShift staff engineers and
communicated to the ART team.

Roles & Responsibilities:

  • Component owners are responsible for ensuring these alignment PRs merge with passing
    tests OR that necessary metadata changes are reported to the ART team: @release-artists
    in #forum-ocp-art on Slack. If necessary, the changes required by this pull request can be
    introduced with a separate PR opened by the component team. Once the repository is aligned,
    this PR will be closed automatically.
  • In particular, it could be that a job like verify-deps is complaining. In that case, please open
    a new PR with the dependency issues addressed (and base images bumped). ART-9595 for reference.
  • Patch-manager or those with sufficient privileges within this repository may add
    any required labels to ensure the PR merges once tests are passing. In cases where ART config is
    canonical, downstream builds are already being built with these changes, and merging this PR
    only improves the fidelity of our CI. In cases where ART config is not canonical, this provides
    a grace period for the component team to align their CI with ART's configuration before it becomes
    canonical in product builds.

ART has been configured to reconcile your CI build root image (see https://docs.ci.openshift.org/docs/architecture/ci-operator/#build-root-image).
In order for your upstream .ci-operator.yaml configuration to be honored, you must set the following in your openshift/release ci-operator configuration file:

build_root:
 from_repository: true

Change behavior of future PRs:

  • In case you just want to follow the base images that ART suggests, you can configure additional labels to be
    set up automatically. This means that such a PR would merge without human intervention (and awareness!) in the future.
    To do so, open a PR to set the auto_label attribute in the image configuration. Example
  • You can set a commit prefix, like UPSTREAM: <carry>: . An example.

If you have any questions about this pull request, please reach out to @release-artists in the #forum-ocp-art coreos slack channel.

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 openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

jira/valid-bug Indicates that a referenced Jira bug is valid for the branch this PR is targeting. jira/valid-reference Indicates that this PR references a valid Jira ticket of any type. verified Signifies that the PR passed pre-merge verification criteria

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants