Demote KEP-5278 feature gates ClearingNominatedNodeNameAfterBinding and NominatedNodeNameForExpectation to Alpha

[utam0k]

What type of PR is this?

/kind feature
/sig scheduling
/cc sanposhiho

What this PR does / why we need it:

Demote KEP-5278 feature gates ClearingNominatedNodeNameAfterBinding and NominatedNodeNameForExpectation to Alpha.
While creating the integration test, we found that some cases had not been given sufficient consideration. To address this issue, we had to modify the design.
#133215

After discussing with @sanposhiho in Slack we decided to make this KEP Alpha.

Which issue(s) this PR is related to:

#132381

Special notes for your reviewer:

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?

Demote KEP-5278 feature gates ClearingNominatedNodeNameAfterBinding and NominatedNodeNameForExpectation to Alpha from Beta

Additional documentation e.g., KEPs (Kubernetes Enhancement Proposals), usage docs, etc.:

- [KEP]:<https://github.com/kubernetes/enhancements/tree/master/keps/sig-scheduling/5278-nominated-node-name-for-expectation>

[k8s-ci-robot]

This issue is currently awaiting triage.

If a SIG or subproject determines this is a relevant issue, they will accept it by applying the triage/accepted label and provide further guidance.

The triage/accepted label can be added by org members by writing /triage accepted in a comment.

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.

[sanposhiho]

We couldn't complete it within the exception request deadline because there's one discussion topic raised at the final PR for adding an integration test.
But, we'd still love to implement this feature as an alpha feature, rather than reverting everything back. (We were originally planning to start from beta)

/lgtm
/approve
/cc @macsko

[k8s-ci-robot]

LGTM label has been added.

Git tree hash: 3aad8f805c83bb9fd670096b6283c7e52c66f965

[macsko]

/approve
Agree with @sanposhiho

[aojea]

/lgtm
/approve

proxying @dom4ha approval, we talked offline as he is on vacation with limited connectivity

[k8s-ci-robot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: aojea, macsko, sanposhiho, utam0k

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:

• pkg/features/OWNERS [aojea]
• test/compatibility_lifecycle/reference/OWNERS [aojea]
• test/integration/scheduler/OWNERS [aojea,macsko,sanposhiho]

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

[aojea]

@Vyom-Yadav to check the milestone and for visibility, since it seems there is also a exception request filed

We couldn't complete it within the exception request deadline because there's #133215 (comment) raised at the final PR for adding an integration test.
But, we'd still love to implement this feature as an alpha feature, rather than reverting everything back. (We were originally planning to start from beta)

[pacoxu]

cc @kubernetes/release-team-leads

[Vyom-Yadav]

We discussed this internally and it's fine to demote this to alpha (more of required as the integration tests weren't merged).

@sanposhiho @utam0k This means the the docs PR would have to be updated and the KEP readme/issue/yaml all of them as well. I'm adding this to the milestone, but open PRs for those as soon as possible. Thanks!

/milestone v1.34

[macsko]

/retest