Skip to content

Bump S-O version to next release 1.38#3942

Merged
openshift-merge-bot[bot] merged 2 commits intoopenshift-knative:mainfrom
dsimansk:pr/bump-next
Feb 11, 2026
Merged

Bump S-O version to next release 1.38#3942
openshift-merge-bot[bot] merged 2 commits intoopenshift-knative:mainfrom
dsimansk:pr/bump-next

Conversation

@dsimansk
Copy link
Contributor

Fixes JIRA #

Proposed Changes

  • Bump S-O version to next release 1.38

/cc @Kaustubh-pande @rudyredhat1 @maschmid

RUN /bin/opm init serverless-operator --default-channel=stable --output yaml >> /configs/index.yaml
RUN cat /index-bundles.yaml >> /configs/index.yaml
RUN /bin/opm render --skip-tls-verify -o yaml \
quay.io/redhat-user-workloads/ocp-serverless-tenant/serverless-operator-137/serverless-bundle@sha256:18c5bc25aa7fd36f1433fe4920a843336517210c903c467b16f035e3a46f2d4e >> /configs/index.yaml
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This will need to replace with serverless-operator-138

@maschmid
Copy link
Contributor

maschmid commented Feb 11, 2026

invalid value "1.25" for flag -compat: maximum supported Go version is 1.24.12

That's probably because of https://github.com/openshift-knative/hack/blob/main/actions/setup-go/action.yaml is still 1.24?

@maschmid
Copy link
Contributor

/lgtm

@dsimansk
Copy link
Contributor Author

invalid value "1.25" for flag -compat: maximum supported Go version is 1.24.12

That's probably because of https://github.com/openshift-knative/hack/blob/main/actions/setup-go/action.yaml is still 1.24?

invalid value "1.25" for flag -compat: maximum supported Go version is 1.24.12

That's probably because of https://github.com/openshift-knative/hack/blob/main/actions/setup-go/action.yaml is still 1.24?

Yes, I've noticed & updated the default version in hack's action and the re-run passed.

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot removed the lgtm label Feb 11, 2026
@maschmid
Copy link
Contributor

/lgtm

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the lgtm label Feb 11, 2026
@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Feb 11, 2026

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: dsimansk, maschmid

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

The pull request process is described here

Details 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

@maschmid
Copy link
Contributor

/test serverless-index-138-fbc-416-on-pull-request

@openshift-ci

This comment was marked as off-topic.

@maschmid
Copy link
Contributor

@maschmid
Copy link
Contributor

/test serverless-index-138-fbc-416-on-pull-request

@openshift-ci

This comment was marked as off-topic.

@maschmid
Copy link
Contributor

DeploymentFailurePostUpgrade is expected to fail in upgrade tests if the queue-proxy is identical between versions (so, the ksvc is never not ready during upgrades, as it doesn't change)

@dsimansk
Copy link
Contributor Author

/override "ci/prow/420-mesh-upgrade "
/override "ci/prow/420-test-upgrade"

@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Feb 11, 2026

@dsimansk: /override requires failed status contexts, check run or a prowjob name to operate on.
The following unknown contexts/checkruns were given:

  • ci/prow/420-mesh-upgrade

Only the following failed contexts/checkruns were expected:

  • Konflux kflux-prd-rh02 / serverless-index-138-fbc-416-on-pull-request
  • Update deps
  • ci/prow/420-images
  • ci/prow/420-kitchensink-e2e
  • ci/prow/420-kitchensink-upgrade
  • ci/prow/420-mesh-e2e
  • ci/prow/420-mesh-upgrade
  • ci/prow/420-operator-e2e
  • ci/prow/420-test-upgrade
  • ci/prow/420-upstream-e2e
  • ci/prow/420-upstream-e2e-kafka
  • pull-ci-openshift-knative-serverless-operator-main-420-images
  • pull-ci-openshift-knative-serverless-operator-main-420-kitchensink-e2e
  • pull-ci-openshift-knative-serverless-operator-main-420-kitchensink-upgrade
  • pull-ci-openshift-knative-serverless-operator-main-420-mesh-e2e
  • pull-ci-openshift-knative-serverless-operator-main-420-mesh-upgrade
  • pull-ci-openshift-knative-serverless-operator-main-420-operator-e2e
  • pull-ci-openshift-knative-serverless-operator-main-420-test-upgrade
  • pull-ci-openshift-knative-serverless-operator-main-420-upstream-e2e
  • pull-ci-openshift-knative-serverless-operator-main-420-upstream-e2e-kafka
  • tide

If you are trying to override a checkrun that has a space in it, you must put a double quote on the context.

Details

In response to this:

/override "ci/prow/420-mesh-upgrade "
/override "ci/prow/420-test-upgrade"

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.

@dsimansk
Copy link
Contributor Author

/override "ci/prow/420-test-upgrade"

@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Feb 11, 2026

@dsimansk: Overrode contexts on behalf of dsimansk: ci/prow/420-test-upgrade

Details

In response to this:

/override "ci/prow/420-test-upgrade"

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.

@dsimansk
Copy link
Contributor Author

/override "ci/prow/420-mesh-upgrade"

@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Feb 11, 2026

@dsimansk: Overrode contexts on behalf of dsimansk: ci/prow/420-mesh-upgrade

Details

In response to this:

/override "ci/prow/420-mesh-upgrade"

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.

@dsimansk
Copy link
Contributor Author

/override "Konflux kflux-prd-rh02 / serverless-index-138-fbc-416-on-pull-request"

@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Feb 11, 2026

@dsimansk: Overrode contexts on behalf of dsimansk: Konflux kflux-prd-rh02 / serverless-index-138-fbc-416-on-pull-request

Details

In response to this:

/override "Konflux kflux-prd-rh02 / serverless-index-138-fbc-416-on-pull-request"

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.

@openshift-merge-bot openshift-merge-bot bot merged commit 38401c2 into openshift-knative:main Feb 11, 2026
28 of 29 checks passed
@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Feb 11, 2026

@dsimansk: The following tests failed, say /retest to rerun all failed tests or /retest-required to rerun all mandatory failed tests:

Test name Commit Details Required Rerun command
ci/prow/ocp-4.21-lp-interop-cr-images 1287dac link true /test ocp-4.21-lp-interop-cr-images
ci/prow/419-images 1287dac link true /test 419-images
ci/prow/419-kitchensink-e2e 1287dac link false /test 419-kitchensink-e2e
ci/prow/419-mesh-e2e 1287dac link false /test 419-mesh-e2e
ci/prow/419-upstream-e2e 1287dac link false /test 419-upstream-e2e
ci/prow/419-operator-e2e 1287dac link true /test 419-operator-e2e
ci/prow/419-upstream-e2e-kafka 1287dac link false /test 419-upstream-e2e-kafka
ci/prow/419-mesh-upgrade 1287dac link false /test 419-mesh-upgrade
ci/prow/419-test-upgrade 1287dac link true /test 419-test-upgrade
ci/prow/419-kitchensink-upgrade 1287dac link false /test 419-kitchensink-upgrade
ci/prow/420-test-upgrade ca4e6e7 link unknown /test 420-test-upgrade
ci/prow/420-operator-e2e ca4e6e7 link unknown /test 420-operator-e2e

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard.

Details

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.

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

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants