Thanks a lot for the review and approval! Appreciate your time and guidance @chaima-belhedi

how did you fix this without updating any markers

you need to edit https://github.com/envoyproxy/gateway/blob/main/api/v1alpha1/envoypatchpolicy_types.go

Thanks for the pointer!
I’ve updated the kubebuilder printcolumn annotations in envoypatchpolicy_types.go to reference status.ancestors[].conditions per Gateway API conventions and regenerated the CRDs.
Please let me know if anything else needs adjustment.

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 72.59%. Comparing base (c1931a6) to head (2dec95f).
⚠️ Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #7776      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   72.61%   72.59%   -0.02%     
==========================================
  Files         235      235              
  Lines       34876    34876              
==========================================
- Hits        25325    25319       -6     
- Misses       7745     7748       +3     
- Partials     1806     1809       +3     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

please run make -k gen-check locally, and commit the changes.

I’ve run make -k gen-check locally and committed the updated helm test outputs.
Thanks!

The remaining CI failures are from coverage-test.
This PR only updates CRD annotations and regenerated manifests, with no executable Go logic changes, so no additional coverage is produced.

Please let me know if you’d prefer:

skipping/overriding coverage for this PR, or

any specific test adjustments you’d like me to make.

Friendly ping — happy to help unblock if anything else is needed.

Thanks for the reviews and approvals!
The remaining CI failures are coverage-related and expected for this CRD-only change.
Happy to let maintainers decide the best way to proceed.

Hi @zirain ,

The PR has approvals now. The only remaining CI failures are coverage tests, which appear expected for this CRD-only change.

Please let me know if you’re okay to merge as-is, or if you’d like me to make any changes before merge.

Thanks everyone for the reviews and help!

/retest

Friendly ping @zirain — whenever you’re back online, please take a look.
Happy to help if anything else is needed. Thanks!

Hi @zirain ,
I checked the failing e2e jobs.

They fail in ZoneAwareRouting / BackendTrafficPolicy tests, which don’t appear related to this PR (CRD printer column metadata only).
The failure happens late in the suite and looks consistent with known e2e flakiness.

I’ve updated the branch to latest main.
Happy to re-run CI or dig further if needed.

Hi @zirain,

I’ve updated the branch to the latest main.

The remaining CI failures are in e2e-related jobs (ZoneAwareRouting / BackendTrafficPolicy) and don’t appear related to this change, which only updates CRD printer column metadata. The failures occur late in the suite and look consistent with known e2e flakiness.

All reviews are approved. Would you mind re-running the failing jobs or overriding CI if you’re comfortable?

Happy to investigate further if you think there’s any possible linkage I’m missing.
Thanks!