infra/ansible
24
5
Fork 48
Code Pull requests 14 Activity Actions

mdapi: fix image trigger annote order on deploy metadata #3338

Merged
t0xic0der merged 1 commit from t0xic0der/ansible:dpmt into main 2026-05-11 02:37:13 +00:00
Conversation 4 Commits 1 Files changed 1 +2 -2
t0xic0der commented 2026-05-08 04:01:50 +00:00
Member
Copy link

The image.openshift.io/triggers annotation was on the pod template metadata
instead of the deployment metadata, so OpenShift's image trigger controller
never detected ImageStream updates for auto-rollout.

Basically, when the MDAPI playbook was re-executed after the repository
fedora-infra/ansible was moved from Pagure to Forgejo, we have not had even
a single rollout, even with all the image builds.

Signed-off-by: Akashdeep Dhar akashdeep.dhar@gmail.com

The `image.openshift.io/triggers` annotation was on the pod template metadata instead of the deployment metadata, so OpenShift's image trigger controller never detected ImageStream updates for auto-rollout. Basically, when the MDAPI playbook was re-executed after the repository `fedora-infra/ansible` was moved from Pagure to Forgejo, we have not had even a single rollout, even with all the image builds. Signed-off-by: Akashdeep Dhar <akashdeep.dhar@gmail.com>
mdapi: fix image trigger annote order on deploy metadata
All checks were successful
Linter / yamllint (pull_request) Successful in 43s
Details
Linter / ansible-lint (pull_request) Successful in 2m24s
Details
AI Code Review / ai-review (pull_request_target) Successful in 25s
Details
1eb15a5fa9 
The `image.openshift.io/triggers` annotation was on the pod template metadata
instead of the deployment metadata, so OpenShift's image trigger controller
never detected ImageStream updates for auto-rollout.

Basically, when the MDAPI playbook was re-executed after the repository
`fedora-infra/ansible` was moved from Pagure to Forgejo, we have not had even
a single rollout, even with all the image builds.

Signed-off-by: Akashdeep Dhar <akashdeep.dhar@gmail.com>
t0xic0der commented 2026-05-08 04:02:46 +00:00
Author
Member
Copy link

@kevin @zlopez could you please take a look? TIA.

@kevin @zlopez could you please take a look? TIA.
forgejo-actions commented 2026-05-08 04:05:28 +00:00
Copy link

AI Code Review

Detailed Code Review

The changes correctly move the image.openshift.io/triggers annotation to the Deployment-level metadata. OpenShift's image trigger controller requires this annotation to be present at the workload resource level (Deployment) rather than the Pod template level to correctly trigger auto-rollouts on ImageStream updates. The JSONPath used in the annotation (spec.template.spec.containers[?(@.name=="mdapi")].image) correctly targets the mdapi container in the spec. No logic or configuration issues found.

✅ Summary

  • Overall Assessment: No critical issues identified. The OpenShift annotation placement fix is logically correct and follows standard specifications for auto-rollouts.

🤖 AI Code Review | Generated with ai-code-review | Model: gemini-3.1-pro-preview

⚠️ AI-generated suggestions may be incorrect. Verify before applying. Not a replacement for human review.

## AI Code Review ### Detailed Code Review The changes correctly move the `image.openshift.io/triggers` annotation to the Deployment-level metadata. OpenShift's image trigger controller requires this annotation to be present at the workload resource level (Deployment) rather than the Pod template level to correctly trigger auto-rollouts on ImageStream updates. The JSONPath used in the annotation (`spec.template.spec.containers[?(@.name=="mdapi")].image`) correctly targets the mdapi container in the spec. No logic or configuration issues found. ### ✅ Summary - **Overall Assessment:** No critical issues identified. The OpenShift annotation placement fix is logically correct and follows standard specifications for auto-rollouts. --- 🤖 **AI Code Review** | Generated with [ai-code-review](https://gitlab.com/redhat/edge/ci-cd/ai-code-review) | **Model:** `gemini-3.1-pro-preview` ⚠️ *AI-generated suggestions may be incorrect. Verify before applying. Not a replacement for human review.*
kevin commented 2026-05-08 18:46:37 +00:00
Owner
Copy link

Ah, this is likely fallout from the deploymentconfig -> deployment stuff?

In any case, looks good to me. +1

Let me know if you would like to merge/deploy or would like me to.

Ah, this is likely fallout from the deploymentconfig -> deployment stuff? In any case, looks good to me. +1 Let me know if you would like to merge/deploy or would like me to.
t0xic0der commented 2026-05-11 02:37:03 +00:00
Author
Member
Copy link

@kevin, thanks for the prompt review!

I am merging this pull request now.

@kevin, thanks for the prompt review! I am merging this pull request now.
Sign in to join this conversation.
Reviewers
No reviewers
kevin
zlopez
Labels
Clear labels   
ai-review-please
label for requesting AI code review

  
freeze-break-request

   
post-freeze
  
Backlog Status
Needs Review
 Work items that have been created or updated but need review, refinement, or approval before they can be considered ready for sprint planning.

  
Backlog Status
Ready
 Work items that have been reviewed, refined, and are ready to be committed to a sprint. These items have clear requirements and can be worked on immediately when capacity is available.

  
chore
Work that needs to be done but doesn't add new functionality or fix bugs. Maintenance tasks that keep the system running smoothly and the codebase clean.

  
documentation
Work focused on creating, updating, or improving documentation for users, developers, or system administrators.

  
points
01
 A task that is simple, small, and has very little uncertainty. It should be easy enough for any team member to pick up and complete quickly, without a lot of discussion or research.

  
points
02
 This is a task that is slightly more complex or larger than a "1." It might involve two or three simple steps, but the outcome is still very clear and there's little uncertainty.

  
points
03
 Medium-sized task with some noticeable complexity. It might require a bit more thought or collaboration. The steps are well-defined, but it's not a trivial change.

  
points
05
 A significant piece of work. It has more complexity and a higher degree of uncertainty than smaller tasks. It might require some research, a design discussion, or collaboration across multiple teams.

  
points
08
 Complex task with a lot of uncertainty. It's often the largest size that a team will consider for a single sprint. It likely requires a detailed breakdown and multiple team members to complete.

  
points
13
 Any task that feels like it's a "13" or more is considered an Epic. These are too large and uncertain to be worked on in a single sprint and should be broken down.

  
Priority
High
 This is for work that is critical and needs to be addressed in the next sprint. It's often for urgent bugs, important features, or a major piece of technical debt that is blocking other work.

  
Priority
Low
 This is for work that is good to do but not urgent. It's a candidate for being worked on when there's extra time or when it rises in importance. It can stay in the backlog for a longer period.

  
Priority
Medium
 This is for important work that should be done soon, but isn't as urgent as a high-priority item. It will likely be considered for the next 1-2 sprints.

  
Sprint Status
Blocked
 Work items that cannot progress due to external dependencies, blockers, or issues that need resolution.

  
Sprint Status
Done
 Work items that have been completed, reviewed, and integrated. No further work is needed within the current sprint.

  
Sprint Status
In Progress
 Work items currently being worked on by a team member. Active development, research, or implementation is happening.

  
Sprint Status
Review
 Work items that are complete but need review, testing, or approval before being marked as done.

  
Sprint Status
To Do
 Work items that are committed to the sprint but haven't been started yet. These items are ready to be picked up by team members.

  
Technical Debt
Work that addresses shortcuts, workarounds, or suboptimal implementations that were done previously to meet deadlines. These items improve code quality, maintainability, or performance without adding new features.

  
Work Item
Bug
 Issues where the system is not working as intended or designed. Bugs represent deviations from expected behavior.

  
Work Item
Epic
 Large initiatives that are broken down into multiple smaller work items (user stories, tasks, bugs). Epics represent significant features or projects that span multiple sprints.

  
Work Item
Spike
 Time-boxed research, investigation, or proof-of-concept work to reduce uncertainty or explore solutions. Spikes help inform future development decisions.

  
Work Item
Task
 Used to break down larger user stories into smaller, manageable implementation pieces. They focus on the specific technical steps needed to deliver the user story's value.

  
Work Item
User Story
 User-facing features or functionality that can be framed from a user perspective, describing what someone wants to accomplish and why.

No labels
ai-review-please
freeze-break-request
post-freeze
Backlog Status
Needs Review
Backlog Status
Ready
chore
documentation
points
01
points
02
points
03
points
05
points
08
points
13
Priority
High
Priority
Low
Priority
Medium
Sprint Status
Blocked
Sprint Status
Done
Sprint Status
In Progress
Sprint Status
Review
Sprint Status
To Do
Technical Debt
Work Item
Bug
Work Item
Epic
Work Item
Spike
Work Item
Task
Work Item
User Story
Milestone
Clear milestone
No items
No milestone
Projects
Clear projects
No items
No project
Assignees
Clear assignees
No assignees
t0xic0der
3 participants
Notifications
Due date
The due date is invalid or out of range. Please use the format "yyyy-mm-dd".

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference
infra/ansible!3338
No description provided.