feat(sdk): Add description to upload_pipeline_version in kfp. Part of #6256

[casassg]

Description of your changes:

• Add description to upload_pipeline_version in kfp.Client.
• Requires feat(frontend): Add to UI pipeline version description. Part of #6256 #6393 to be released in backend for this to be useful.

Part of #6256

[google-oss-robot]

Hi @casassg. Thanks for your PR.

I'm waiting for a kubeflow 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.

[Bobgy]

if we are using an old version of kfp-server-api, will passing None to this description field break, because there is no description field?

[casassg]

Given the code, I don't think so. It will be a noop really. It may also be reasonable to ask users to upgrade the server-api to use this as otherwise its pretty much not usable.

https://github.com/kubeflow/pipelines/blob/master/backend/api/python_http_client/kfp_server_api/api/pipeline_upload_service_api.py#L138

[Bobgy]

As reported in #6256 (comment), this is actually a breaking change. I'd suggest constructing args to upload_pipeline_version using a dictionary, and then passing the dictionary to the method. In this way, when user does not provide their own description, we can omit the description key altogether.

[casassg]

You are right, I missed the validation step on line 121. Opened #6472 to do the approach. Let's discuss there how to best handle this

[Bobgy]

Edited title format to conform with our routines

[Bobgy]

/lgtm
@chensun can you help with the review too?

[chensun]

/lgtm
/approve

[google-oss-robot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: chensun

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:

• sdk/OWNERS [chensun]

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