⚠️ Fix group issue and add age column to DockerMachinePools

[Jont828]

What this PR does / why we need it: Follow up to #5180. There was an issue with DockerMachinePools having the wrong CRD name generated (exp.infrastructure.cluster.x-k8s.io_dockermachinepools.yaml instead of infrastructure.cluster.x-k8s.io_dockermachinepools.yaml), and so the age column was not added in #5180. This corrects the issue and adds the age column as well.

Which issue(s) this PR fixes (optional, in fixes #<issue number>(, fixes #<issue_number>, ...) format, will close the issue(s) when PR gets merged):
Fixes #5159

[k8s-ci-robot]

Hi @Jont828. Thanks for your PR.

I'm waiting for a kubernetes-sigs member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with /ok-to-test on its own line. Until that is done, I will not automatically test new commits in this PR, but the usual testing commands by org members will still work. Regular contributors should join the org to skip this step.

Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the ok-to-test label.

I understand the commands that are listed here.

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.

[jackfrancis]

lgtm

[sbueringer]

/ok-to-test

[JoelSpeed]

AFAIK if there are no additionalPrinterColumns the CRD gets an age column automatically, is the idea here that we add the age column everywhere in case we add others printer columns later?

[sbueringer]

Yes, there is no way to do it automatically (it's only added per default if no additionalPrinterColumns are configured).
Some additional context: #5180 (comment) (especially apiextensions/helpers.go).

So yes, the idea is to add it everywhere now, so we don't forget to add it later.

[Jont828]

I've changed the template in DockerMachinePool in both v1alpha3 and v1alpha4 from DockerMachineTemplate to DockerMachinePoolTemplate. I initially only changed it in v1alpha4, but I was running into an issue where the generated conversion functions were not working since the types were different between versions. Any thoughts on this?

[sbueringer]

@Jont828 I think we should probably call it DockerMachinePoolMachineTemplate instead of DockerMachinePoolTemplate. DockerMachinePoolTemplate can be misleading as it suggests that it's a template of a DockerMachinePool.

I'm not 100% sure about the conversion. In general, it should be possible to convert the type (we have a few examples in other packages). But not sure if we still have the problem in the CRD if we keep the struct in v1alpha3 the same. Given that CAPD is mainly used for development purposes it could be fine to even change the old struct.

[Jont828]

@sbueringer That makes sense, I guess it's just an awkward case of the desired name being taken. As for the conversion, I discussed w/ Cecile and she mentioned that in changing AzureMachineTemplate, she had to update the name in both v1alpha3 and v1alpha4. I think changing the v1alpha3 struct is probably fine since the json name is still the same and I don't believe the type gets directly accessed (unless I'm mistaken).

[sbueringer]

/lgtm
/retest
I think you can squash

[vincepri]

@Jont828 Please squash commits

[vincepri]

/approve

Let's let the bot merge squash and merge

[k8s-ci-robot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: vincepri

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

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• OWNERS [vincepri]

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment