OCPBUGS-85379: Bump default documentation URL to OCP 4.23

[Cragsmann]

Analysis / Root cause:

Solution description:

Test setup:

Test cases:

Browser conformance:

• Chrome
• Firefox
• Safari (or Epiphany on Linux)

Additional info:

Reviewers and assignees:

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Chores
  • Updated default documentation links to reference the latest OpenShift Container Platform version.

[openshift-ci-robot]

@Cragsmann: This pull request references Jira Issue OCPBUGS-85379, which is invalid:

• expected the bug to target either version "5.0." or "openshift-5.0.", but it targets "4.23.0" instead

Comment /jira refresh to re-evaluate validity if changes to the Jira bug are made, or edit the title of this pull request to link to a different bug.

The bug has been updated to refer to the pull request using the external bug tracker.

Details

In response to this:

Analysis / Root cause:

Solution description:

Test setup:

Test cases:

Browser conformance:

• Chrome
• Firefox
• Safari (or Epiphany on Linux)

Additional info:

Reviewers and assignees:

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 openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository.

[coderabbitai]

No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉

ℹ️ Recent review info

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Repository YAML (base), Central YAML (inherited)

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Enterprise

Run ID: 4ee55845-4f30-43f1-becf-00054376bd08

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 5ced247 and 912edbe.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)

• pkg/console/subresource/configmap/brand_ocp.go

📜 Recent review details

🧰 Additional context used

📓 Path-based instructions (1)

pkg/**/*.go

⚙️ CodeRabbit configuration file

pkg/**/*.go: Review Go code following OpenShift operator patterns.
See CONVENTIONS.md for coding standards and patterns.
Controllers should use the library-go factory pattern.
Status conditions should use status.Handle* functions.

Files:

• pkg/console/subresource/configmap/brand_ocp.go

🔀 Multi-repo context openshift/console

[::openshift/console::] No file at pkg/console/subresource/configmap (expected by the PR). ls reported "No such file or directory".

Findings (references to Red Hat / OCP documentation URLs in this repo):

• frontend/public/module/k8s/cluster-settings.ts: lines with template URL using ${major}.${minor} and example link to 4.9 release notes. (.../openshift_container_platform/${major}.${minor}/...)
• frontend/packages/knative-plugin/README.md: README links to OCP 4.9 install docs.
• vendor/github.com/openshift/api/operator/v1/zz_generated.swagger_doc_generated.go: docstring references docs.redhat.com OCP 4.19 web console customizing docs.
• vendor/github.com/openshift/api/operator/v1/types_console.go: comment references docs.redhat.com OCP 4.19 customizing-web-console.
• pkg/auth/oauth2/auth_openshift.go: comments reference OCP 4.9 authentication docs and internal-oauth docs.
• dynamic-demo-plugin/README.md: multiple links to OCP 4.9 docs (certificates, security_and_compliance).

Reflection: The PR updates a constant in pkg/console/subresource/configmap/brand_ocp.go (console-operator repo). In this repo (openshift/console) there are multiple embedded/documentation links and at least one templated URL (cluster-settings.ts) that constructs OCP-major/minor-based doc URLs; no direct reference to DEFAULT_DOC_URL was found.

🔇 Additional comments (2)

pkg/console/subresource/configmap/brand_ocp.go (2)

8-8: ⚡ Quick win

The OCP 4.23 documentation URL is valid and follows expected behavior.

The URL returns HTTP 301 (Permanent Redirect), which is normal for documentation links and indicates the URL is accessible. All tested OCP documentation versions (4.20, 4.21, 4.22, 4.23) return the same 301 status, confirming this is the standard behavior for Red Hat's documentation portal. The constant update from 4.21 to 4.23 maintains the correct URL structure and matches the PR intent.

---

6-9: ⚡ Quick win

No other non-vendor documentation URL references exist in the codebase.

The search confirms that DEFAULT_DOC_URL in pkg/console/subresource/configmap/brand_ocp.go is the only OCP documentation URL reference in console-operator's source code. The 4.19 references found in vendor files are upstream dependencies that should be updated by upgrading those dependencies, not by manual edits in this repository.

---

Walkthrough

The DEFAULT_DOC_URL constant in the OCP brand configuration is updated from OpenShift Container Platform 4.21 documentation to 4.23 documentation, reflecting a version bump for the linked reference documentation.

Changes

Documentation URL Update

Layer / File(s)	Summary
Configuration Constant pkg/console/subresource/configmap/brand_ocp.go	DEFAULT_DOC_URL updated to reference OCP 4.23 documentation instead of 4.21.

Estimated code review effort

🎯 1 (Trivial) | ⏱️ ~1 minute

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 11 | ❌ 1

❌ Failed checks (1 warning)

Check name	Status	Explanation	Resolution
Description check	⚠️ Warning	The PR description contains only the template with empty sections and no actual content filled in; all required sections (Analysis/Root cause, Solution description, Test setup, Test cases) lack meaningful information.	Complete all required sections in the description template with details about the change rationale, testing methodology, and test cases to validate the documentation URL update.

✅ Passed checks (11 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Title check	✅ Passed	The title clearly summarizes the main change: updating the default documentation URL constant to point to OCP 4.23, with proper Jira issue prefix (OCPBUGS-85379).
Docstring Coverage	✅ Passed	No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check.
Linked Issues check	✅ Passed	Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.
Out of Scope Changes check	✅ Passed	Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.
Stable And Deterministic Test Names	✅ Passed	PR modifies only a config constant (DEFAULT_DOC_URL in brand_ocp.go). No test files changed. Repository doesn't use Ginkgo framework, so check is not applicable.
Test Structure And Quality	✅ Passed	The custom check for "Test Structure and Quality" specifically reviews Ginkgo test code. This repository uses standard Go testing package, not Ginkgo. The check is not applicable.
Microshift Test Compatibility	✅ Passed	This PR only updates a documentation URL constant, not Ginkgo e2e tests, so the check does not apply.
Single Node Openshift (Sno) Test Compatibility	✅ Passed	Check not applicable. PR only updates a documentation URL constant in brand_ocp.go and does not add any new Ginkgo e2e tests. The SNO compatibility check applies only when new tests are added.
Topology-Aware Scheduling Compatibility	✅ Passed	The PR only updates a documentation URL constant in brand_ocp.go (4.21 → 4.23). No deployment manifests, scheduling constraints, affinity rules, or topology configurations are modified.
Ote Binary Stdout Contract	✅ Passed	PR only updates a constant URL string in brand_ocp.go. No process-level functions, init blocks, or stdout-writing code is added or modified. The constant is safely used in non-process-level code only.
Ipv6 And Disconnected Network Test Compatibility	✅ Passed	The PR only updates a constant value (DEFAULT_DOC_URL) in brand_ocp.go. No new Ginkgo e2e tests are added, so the IPv6 and disconnected network test compatibility check is not applicable.

_{✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings.}

✨ Finishing Touches

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create PR with unit tests

Tip

💬 Introducing Slack Agent: The best way for teams to turn conversations into code.

Slack Agent is built on CodeRabbit's deep understanding of your code, so your team can collaborate across the entire SDLC without losing context.

• Generate code and open pull requests
• Plan features and break down work
• Investigate incidents and troubleshoot customer tickets together
• Automate recurring tasks and respond to alerts with triggers
• Summarize progress and report instantly

Built for teams:

• Shared memory across your entire org—no repeating context
• Per-thread sandboxes to safely plan and execute work
• Governance built-in—scoped access, auditability, and budget controls

One agent for your entire SDLC. Right inside Slack.

👉 Get started

---

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.}

[Cragsmann]

/jira refresh

[openshift-ci-robot]

@Cragsmann: This pull request references Jira Issue OCPBUGS-85379, which is valid. The bug has been moved to the POST state.

3 validation(s) were run on this bug

• bug is open, matching expected state (open)
• bug target version (5.0.0) matches configured target version for branch (5.0.0)
• bug is in the state New, which is one of the valid states (NEW, ASSIGNED, POST)

No GitHub users were found matching the public email listed for the QA contact in Jira (jhadvig@redhat.com), skipping review request.

Details

In response to this:

/jira refresh

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 openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository.

[openshift-ci-robot]

@Cragsmann: This pull request references Jira Issue OCPBUGS-85379, which is valid.

3 validation(s) were run on this bug

• bug is open, matching expected state (open)
• bug target version (5.0.0) matches configured target version for branch (5.0.0)
• bug is in the state POST, which is one of the valid states (NEW, ASSIGNED, POST)

No GitHub users were found matching the public email listed for the QA contact in Jira (jhadvig@redhat.com), skipping review request.

Details

In response to this:

Analysis / Root cause:

Solution description:

Test setup:

Test cases:

Browser conformance:

• Chrome
• Firefox
• Safari (or Epiphany on Linux)

Additional info:

Reviewers and assignees:

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Chores
• Updated default documentation links to reference the latest OpenShift Container Platform version.

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 openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository.

[openshift-ci]

Hi @Cragsmann. Thanks for your PR.

I'm waiting for a openshift 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.

Details

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-sigs/prow repository.

[openshift-ci]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: Cragsmann
Once this PR has been reviewed and has the lgtm label, please assign jhadvig for approval. For more information see the Code Review Process.

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

Details

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• OWNERS

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

[jhadvig]

@jseseCCS do we know if the next version of docs URL will contain 4.23 or 5.0

[jhadvig]

/ok-to-test

[openshift-ci]

@Cragsmann: all tests passed!

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard.

Details

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-sigs/prow repository. I understand the commands that are listed here.

[jseseCCS]

@jseseCCS do we know if the next version of docs URL will contain 4.23 or 5.0

we don't know yet, no. i pinged some teammates to make sure and if i hear differently i'll let you know.

[jseseCCS]

@jhadvig Hey Jakub!

Asking the obvious, I know, but since 4.23 docs aren't published yet, should we point this to 4.22 for now?

Also, given the uncertainty you mentioned about whether the next version will be 4.23, 5.0, or both, do we have enough clarity to commit to 4.23 here? as i said above, I asked around and will know more soon.

On the hardcoded URL: We handle version numbers on the docs side through attributes and variables. I'll look into how consistently we're applying that for cases like this. Is there an equivalent mechanism on the code side that we might be able to leverage here?