prevent conflict with pre-existing auth annotation #152
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
xrstf
force-pushed
the
fix-webhook-key-name
branch
from
1663623
to
6a3637a
Compare
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What type of PR is this?
/kind bug
In #151 I accidentally used a field name that I thought was not yet merged or used in kcp. However once we bumped the k8s dependency in kcp, we swiftly noticed that the previous key was in fact already used in kcp, breaking quite a few e2e tests.
This PR rectifies that by choosing a new, unused name for the extra config key.
Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?
(I will update the previous PR's release-notes.)
Additional documentation e.g., KEPs (Kubernetes Enhancement Proposals), usage docs, etc.: