Deprecate experimentalRetryJoin in CABPK

[randomvariable]

What steps did you take and what happened:
[A clear and concise description on how to REPRODUCE the bug.]

We've talked about it for ages, and have forgotten to do it for multiple releases, but we really should have deprecated experimentalRetryJoin in CABPK as it was a stopgap whilst waiting for features in kubeadm.

We should review the support matrix, determine if we still need it, and start the process of removing it.

What did you expect to happen:

Anything else you would like to add:
[Miscellaneous information that will assist in solving the issue.]

Environment:

• Cluster-api version: v1.0.0
• Minikube/KIND version:
• Kubernetes version: (use kubectl version):
• OS (e.g. from /etc/os-release):

/kind bug
[One or more /area label. See https://github.com/kubernetes-sigs/cluster-api/labels?q=area for the list of labels]
/area cleanup

[k8s-ci-robot]

@randomvariable: The label(s) area/cleanup cannot be applied, because the repository doesn't have them.

In response to this:

What steps did you take and what happened:
[A clear and concise description on how to REPRODUCE the bug.]

We've talked about it for ages, and have forgotten to do it for multiple releases, but we really should have deprecated experimentalRetryJoin in CABPK as it was a stopgap whilst waiting for features in kubeadm.

We should review the support matrix, determine if we still need it, and start the process of removing it.

What did you expect to happen:

Anything else you would like to add:
[Miscellaneous information that will assist in solving the issue.]

Environment:

• Cluster-api version: v1.0.0
• Minikube/KIND version:
• Kubernetes version: (use kubectl version):
• OS (e.g. from /etc/os-release):

/kind bug
[One or more /area label. See https://github.com/kubernetes-sigs/cluster-api/labels?q=area for the list of labels]
/area cleanup

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/test-infra repository.

[randomvariable]

/kind cleanup

[killianmuldoon]

/assign

[fabriziopandini]

/milestone v1.2

[k8s-triage-robot]

The Kubernetes project currently lacks enough contributors to adequately respond to all issues and PRs.

This bot triages issues and PRs according to the following rules:

• After 90d of inactivity, lifecycle/stale is applied
• After 30d of inactivity since lifecycle/stale was applied, lifecycle/rotten is applied
• After 30d of inactivity since lifecycle/rotten was applied, the issue is closed

You can:

• Mark this issue or PR as fresh with /remove-lifecycle stale
• Mark this issue or PR as rotten with /lifecycle rotten
• Close this issue or PR with /close
• Offer to help out with Issue Triage

Please send feedback to sig-contributor-experience at kubernetes/community.

/lifecycle stale

[k8s-triage-robot]

The Kubernetes project currently lacks enough active contributors to adequately respond to all issues and PRs.

This bot triages issues and PRs according to the following rules:

• After 90d of inactivity, lifecycle/stale is applied
• After 30d of inactivity since lifecycle/stale was applied, lifecycle/rotten is applied
• After 30d of inactivity since lifecycle/rotten was applied, the issue is closed

You can:

• Mark this issue or PR as fresh with /remove-lifecycle rotten
• Close this issue or PR with /close
• Offer to help out with Issue Triage

Please send feedback to sig-contributor-experience at kubernetes/community.

/lifecycle rotten

[k8s-triage-robot]

The Kubernetes project currently lacks enough active contributors to adequately respond to all issues and PRs.

This bot triages issues and PRs according to the following rules:

• After 90d of inactivity, lifecycle/stale is applied
• After 30d of inactivity since lifecycle/stale was applied, lifecycle/rotten is applied
• After 30d of inactivity since lifecycle/rotten was applied, the issue is closed

You can:

• Reopen this issue or PR with /reopen
• Mark this issue or PR as fresh with /remove-lifecycle rotten
• Offer to help out with Issue Triage

Please send feedback to sig-contributor-experience at kubernetes/community.

/close

[k8s-ci-robot]

@k8s-triage-robot: Closing this issue.

In response to this:

The Kubernetes project currently lacks enough active contributors to adequately respond to all issues and PRs.

This bot triages issues and PRs according to the following rules:

• After 90d of inactivity, lifecycle/stale is applied
• After 30d of inactivity since lifecycle/stale was applied, lifecycle/rotten is applied
• After 30d of inactivity since lifecycle/rotten was applied, the issue is closed

You can:

• Reopen this issue or PR with /reopen
• Mark this issue or PR as fresh with /remove-lifecycle rotten
• Offer to help out with Issue Triage

Please send feedback to sig-contributor-experience at kubernetes/community.

/close

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/test-infra repository.

[sbueringer]

/reopen

/remove-lifecycle rotten

[k8s-ci-robot]

@sbueringer: Reopened this issue.

In response to this:

/reopen

/remove-lifecycle rotten

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/test-infra repository.

[killianmuldoon]

It looks like there were five separate issues logged in relation to the kubadm join retry problem:
kubernetes/kubeadm#2094
kubernetes/kubeadm#2093
kubernetes/kubeadm#2092
kubernetes/kubeadm#2091
kubernetes/kubeadm#2095

The associated fixes made it into kubeadm and were cherry picked to 1.18 and 1.17. Currently in our support matrix our minimum supported Kubernetes version is 1.18 for workload clusters on release 1.2.

I think it's safe to deprecate this field now and mark it for removal in 1.3.

[fabriziopandini]

The deprecation process is started, however, before removal I would like to check again with providers/with the community

[killianmuldoon]

I'll create a new issue to discuss that and outline the steps for removal - it's a little more complicated than just removing the field this time 🙂