Align networking extensions to provider extensions #547
Conversation
This file contains hidden or 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
gardener-robot
added
needs/review
area/networking
ScheererJ
force-pushed
the
enhancement/align-networking-extensions-to-provider-extensions
branch
from
fd05a84 to
43c1d4b
Compare
ScheererJ
force-pushed
the
enhancement/align-networking-extensions-to-provider-extensions
branch
from
43c1d4b to
032949a
Compare
|
/test pull-extension-networking-cilium-e2e-kind |
|
/lgtm |
axel7born
approved these changes
Apr 15, 2025
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
How to categorize this PR?
/area networking
/kind technical-debt
What this PR does / why we need it:
Align networking extensions to provider extensions. This change adapts the extension and admission components to be more in line with the provider extensions.
Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
Fixes #
Special notes for your reviewer:
I used provider aws as the source for the comparison.
Release note: