Add support for kubectl create quota command

[sttts]

Follow-up of #19625

Create a resourcequota with the specified name, hard limits and optional scopes

Usage:
  kubectl create quota NAME [--hard=key1=value1,key2=value2] [--scopes=Scope1,Scope2] [--dry-run=bool] [flags]

Aliases:
  quota, q


Examples:
  // Create a new resourcequota named my-quota
  $ kubectl create quota my-quota --hard=cpu=1,memory=1G,pods=2,services=3,replicationcontrollers=2,resourcequotas=1,secrets=5,persistentvolumeclaims=10

  // Create a new resourcequota named best-effort
  $ kubectl create quota best-effort --hard=pods=100 --scopes=BestEffort

[googlebot]

We found a Contributor License Agreement for you (the sender of this pull request) and all commit authors, but as best as we can tell these commits were authored by someone else. If that's the case, please add them to this pull request and have them confirm that they're okay with these commits being contributed to Google. If we're mistaken and you did author these commits, just reply here to confirm.

[derekwaynecarr]

Fix year

[derekwaynecarr]

Didn't do a deep review but please add support for specifying scopes as well via a flag

[sttts]

@derekwaynecarr scopes are coming... only did a quick rebase and some fixes for your old review comments.

[sttts]

@derekwaynecarr ptal, scopes are done.

[sttts]

@maazkhan can you make the cla bot happy with a short confirmation that you are ok with the commit?

[maazkhan]

ok to commit.

[derekwaynecarr]

@eparis - what is needed so @sttts is automatically cla:yes ?

[sttts]

@derekwaynecarr I usually get automatic cla:yes. It's because I rebased the first commit by @maazkhan.

[sttts]

@derekwaynecarr scopes are done. Can you take another look?

[derekwaynecarr]

nit: the check is cleaner to me if we just have a

if expected := resource.MustParse("100000); r, found := ...; !found || r.Cmp(expected) != 0 {
...
}

[sttts]

Go only allow one simple statements. We have to write it in two lines:

r, found := quota.Spec.Hard[api.ResourcePods]
if expected := resource.MustParse("1000000"); !found || (&r).Cmp(expected) != 0 {

[derekwaynecarr]

a couple nits, squash commtis, and then this looks ok to me.

[deads2k]

@ncdc Make lawyer-bot happy?

@sttts Mind squashing in the generation. Otherwise we have a commit history where some commits are invalid and that's not much generated code.

[sttts]

@deads2k the cla label hopefully is fine with the human-approved override. I have squashed the generated files into the previous patch.

[deads2k]

@deads2k the cla label hopefully is fine with the human-approved override. I have squashed the generated files into the previous patch.

Yeah, but I hate chasing them around. It'll be like @Kargakis all over again!

[k8s-bot]

GCE e2e build/test passed for commit 199f991.

• Test Results
• Build Log
• Test Artifacts
• Internal Jenkins Results

[k8s-github-robot]

@k8s-bot test this [submit-queue is verifying that this PR is safe to merge]

[k8s-bot]

GCE e2e build/test passed for commit 199f991.

• Test Results
• Build Log
• Test Artifacts
• Internal Jenkins Results

[k8s-github-robot]

Automatic merge from submit-queue

[0xmichalis]

Let's hope we will be luckier with the next bot: #27796