Automatic merge from submit-queue (batch tested with PRs 39418, 41175, 40355, 41114, 32325)
TaintController
```release-note
This PR adds a manager to NodeController that is responsible for removing Pods from Nodes tainted with NoExecute Taints. This feature is beta (as the rest of taints) and enabled by default. It's gated by controller-manager enable-taint-manager flag.
```
Automatic merge from submit-queue (batch tested with PRs 40917, 41181, 41123, 36592, 41183)
Set all node conditions to Unknown when node is unreachable
**What this PR does / why we need it**:
Sets all node conditions to Unknown when node does not report status/unreachable
**Which issue this PR fixes**
fixes https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/issues/36273
Automatic merge from submit-queue
Replace hand-written informers with generated ones
Replace existing uses of hand-written informers with generated ones.
Follow-up commits will switch the use of one-off informers to shared
informers.
This is a precursor to #40097. That PR will switch one-off informers to shared informers for the majority of the code base (but not quite all of it...).
NOTE: this does create a second set of shared informers in the kube-controller-manager. This will be resolved back down to a single factory once #40097 is reviewed and merged.
There are a couple of places where I expanded the # of caches we wait for in the calls to `WaitForCacheSync` - please pay attention to those. I also added in a commented-out wait in the attach/detach controller. If @kubernetes/sig-storage-pr-reviews is ok with enabling the waiting, I'll do it (I'll just need to tweak an integration test slightly).
@deads2k @sttts @smarterclayton @liggitt @soltysh @timothysc @lavalamp @wojtek-t @gmarek @sjenning @derekwaynecarr @kubernetes/sig-scalability-pr-reviews
Automatic merge from submit-queue (batch tested with PRs 40239, 40397, 40449, 40448, 40360)
move the discovery and dynamic clients
Moved the dynamic client, discovery client, testing/core, and testing/cache to `client-go`. Dependencies on api groups we don't have generated clients for have dropped out, so federation, kubeadm, and imagepolicy.
@caesarxuchao @sttts
approved based on https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/issues/40363
When tryUpdateNodeStatus() return err,err!=nil, but nc.kubeClient.Core().Nodes().Get() return no err, err==nil,
And we run nodeStatusUpdateRetry times, when for loop ends, err == nil, we can not print error info and run continue, so the condition judgement is wrong.
Automatic merge from submit-queue (batch tested with PRs 38154, 38502)
Rename "release_1_5" clientset to just "clientset"
We used to keep multiple releases in the main repo. Now that [client-go](https://github.com/kubernetes/client-go) does the versioning, there is no need to keep releases in the main repo. This PR renames the "release_1_5" clientset to just "clientset", clientset development will be done in this directory.
@kubernetes/sig-api-machinery @deads2k
```release-note
The main repository does not keep multiple releases of clientsets anymore. Please find previous releases at https://github.com/kubernetes/client-go
```
Automatic merge from submit-queue
Curating Owners: pkg/controller
cc @jsafrane @mikedanese @bprashanth @derekwaynecarr @thockin @saad-ali
In an effort to expand the existing pool of reviewers and establish a
two-tiered review process (first someone **lgtms** and then someone
experienced in the project **approves**), we are adding new reviewers to
existing owners files.
## If You Care About the Process:
We did this by algorithmically figuring out who’s contributed code to
the project and in what directories. Unfortunately, that doesn’t work
perfectly: people that have made mechanical code changes (e.g change the
copyright header across all directories) end up as reviewers in lots of
places.
Instead of using pure commit data, we generated an excessively large
list of reviewers and pruned based on all time commit data, recent
commit data and review data (number of PRs commented on).
At this point we have a decent list of reviewers, but it needs one last
pass for fine tuning.
## TLDR:
As an owner of a sig/directory and a leader of the project, here’s what
we need from you:
1. Use PR https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/pull/35715 as an example.
2. The pull-request is made editable, please edit the OWNERS file to add
the names of people that should be reviewing code in the future in the **reviewers** section. You probably do NOT need to modify the **approvers** section.
3. Notify me if you want some OWNERS file to be removed. Being an approver or reviewer
of a parent directory makes you a reviewer/approver of the subdirectories too, so not all
OWNERS files may be necessary.
4. Please use ALIAS if you want to use the same list of people over and
over again (don't hesitate to ask me for help, or use the pull-request
above as an example)
Kubernetes Submit Queue