Get details of only declarative serve apps

[jugalshah291]

Why are these changes needed?

As part of this PR I am trying to address Problem 2 raised in issue ray-project/ray#44226.

The main aim is to enable KubeRay to exclusively check the status of only DECLARATIVE Serve apps.
The solution would be build on top of this ray-project/ray#45522

Based on my current understanding, it seems KubeRay should only operate on the DECLARATIVE Serve apps
Thus my solution will involve two key steps:

Update the /api/serve/applications/ endpoint to read the APIType from the request body and pass it on to the controller controller.get_serve_instance_details - Ray ray-project/ray#56458
(This PR) Modify KubeRay to explicitly pass Declarative as the APIType when calling the /api/serve/applications/

Related issue number

Checks

• I've made sure the tests are passing.
• Testing Strategy
  • Unit tests
  • Manual tests
  • This PR is not tested :(

[Future-Outlier]

Hi, @jugalshah291
is this backward compatible?
what will happen when

1. new kuberay + old ray image
2. old kuberay + new ray image

will all of them work as expected?

update:
after traced the code from ray, I think it's backward compatible

[Future-Outlier]

You can fix CI error here

https://github.com/ray-project/kuberay/blob/master/docs/development/development.md#pre-commit-hooks

[Future-Outlier]

I am thinking that we should add e2e test for this PR or not.
cc @andrewsykim @rueian

[jugalshah291]

Hi, @jugalshah291 is this backward compatible? what will happen when

1. new kuberay + old ray image
2. old kuberay + new ray image

will all of them work as expected?

update: after traced the code from ray, I think it's backward compatible

Yeah I had tested in my local and also went through ray

• new kuberay + old ray image - works since old ray doesn't read any params and returns all serve app
• old kuberay + new ray image - works since the the new param is None by default

[jugalshah291]

I am thinking that we should add e2e test for this PR or not. cc @andrewsykim @rueian

I am not sure how the e2e test are setup can you share the file where existing tests are present, I can add to it

[rueian]

I am thinking that we should add e2e test for this PR or not. cc @andrewsykim @rueian

Since this is adding a new query parameter, we need e2e tests to make sure it doesn't break on old Ray versions. And I think the existing e2e tests are already enough to cover that.

[jugalshah291]

@Future-Outlier can we merge this

[Future-Outlier]

@Future-Outlier can we merge this

cc @rueian for the merge, thank you!

[jugalshah291]

Hi @rueian can you please get help with getting this merge