-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 15
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
chore: update helm version #1534
Open
xazhao
wants to merge
2
commits into
kubectl-v20/main
Choose a base branch
from
update-helm-version
base: kubectl-v20/main
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
+11
−8
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
2 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
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
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
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
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
Oops, something went wrong.
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.
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.
we're using this layer in aws-cdk-lib if I'm not wrong, any change in here can lead to breaking change for the customers as well as it being used here in CDK.
https://github.com/aws/aws-cdk/blob/main/packages/aws-cdk-lib/lambda-layer-kubectl/lib/kubectl-layer.ts#L1. Though, EKS natively doesn't support this kubectl version, not sure if we still want to keep it to older version in main lib https://docs.aws.amazon.com/eks/latest/userguide/kubernetes-versions.html.
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.
Yes this layer is used in
aws-cdk-lib
and is outdated.There are 3 ways to resolve it:
kubectlLayer
required from optionalkubectlLayer
default versionhelm
versionAll of them are breaking changes. 3) is the solution has least impact. Since this layer is not supported natively by EKS, the change impact is minimal.
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.
Similar with change as this PR #623
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.
I'd argue (1) has the least impact. Yes, it will break builds. But at least it will break them transparently. Both (2) and (3) might or might not break a customer depending on the exact circumstances. However if it does, the failure will be much less transparent and a few steps removed. (1) has a guarantee to have zero impact on deployed resources. With (2) & (3) we have the potential to cause an outage to a customer.