Automated release of 34.1.1

[stephenfin]

What type of PR is this?

/kind feature

What this PR does / why we need it:

Release a version without the cap on urllib3 to allow installation of the latest urllib and mitigate CVE-2025-50181

Which issue(s) this PR fixes:

Fixes #

Special notes for your reviewer:

I don't know if this is permitted or if versioning is somehow tied to k8s proper. Feel free to close in favour of an alternative if necessary. The main concern here is unsticking the bump of urllib3.

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?

NONE

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

[k8s-ci-robot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: stephenfin
Once this PR has been reviewed and has the lgtm label, please assign yliaog for approval. For more information see the Code Review Process.

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

Details

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• OWNERS

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

[k8s-ci-robot]

Welcome @stephenfin!

It looks like this is your first PR to kubernetes-client/python 🎉. Please refer to our pull request process documentation to help your PR have a smooth ride to approval.

You will be prompted by a bot to use commands during the review process. Do not be afraid to follow the prompts! It is okay to experiment. Here is the bot commands documentation.

You can also check if kubernetes-client/python has its own contribution guidelines.

You may want to refer to our testing guide if you run into trouble with your tests not passing.

If you are having difficulty getting your pull request seen, please follow the recommended escalation practices. Also, for tips and tricks in the contribution process you may want to read the Kubernetes contributor cheat sheet. We want to make sure your contribution gets all the attention it needs!

Thank you, and welcome to Kubernetes. 😃

[stephenfin]

/cc @roycaihw
/cc @yliaog

[yliaog]

/assign @roycaihw

[joelhess]

Might need #2479 to go first?

[stephenfin]

Might need #2479 to go first?

That needs more rework, as noted here. Those methods were removed in 2.6.0 but were subsequently restored in 2.6.1 restored so while we will get deprecation warnings they will work.

[stephenfin]

I proposed #2497 but tbh, I don't believe that needs to merge (or even should be merged) given my note above. We'd be far better off investing our time in bumping the version of openapi-generator used here.