Users who maintain controllers which relied on the fact that pods with RestartPolicy=Always
  never enter the Succeeded phase may need to adapt their controllers. This is because as a consequence of 
  the change pods which use RestartPolicy=Always may end up in the Succeeded phase in two scenarios: pod 

* When a kubelet is using --bootstrap-kubeconfig and certificate rotation, it no longer waits for bootstrap to succeed before launching static pods. ([#71174](https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/pull/71174), [@smarterclayton](https://github.com/smarterclayton))

  - warn - perform server-side validation and warn on any invalid fields (but ultimately let the request succeed by dropping any invalid fields from the object). If validation is not available on the server, perform no validation.

- Eviction requests for pods that have a non-zero DeletionTimestamp will always succeed ([#91342](https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/pull/91342), [@michaelgugino](https://github.com/michaelgugino)) [SIG Apps]

* Make error message and service event message more clear ([#86078](https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/pull/86078), [@feiskyer](https://github.com/feiskyer))
* e2e-test-framework: add e2e test namespace dump if all tests succeed but the cleanup fails. ([#85542](https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/pull/85542), [@schrodit](https://github.com/schrodit))

- Eviction requests for pods that have a non-zero DeletionTimestamp will always succeed ([#91342](https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/pull/91342), [@michaelgugino](https://github.com/michaelgugino)) [SIG Apps]

- Fixed two regressions introduced by the PodDisruptionConditions feature (on by default in 1.26):
  - pod eviction API calls returned spurious precondition errors and required a second evict API call to succeed
  - dry-run eviction API calls persisted a DisruptionTarget condition into the pod being evicted ([#116750](https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/pull/116750), [@atiratree](https://github.com/atiratree)) [SIG API Machinery and Testing]

        context.put("authMethod", authMethod);
        context.put("success", success);

        String message = buildAuthMessage(success, maskedUsername, maskedAddress, authMethod);

        logEvent(type, severity, message, context);
        returnContextMap(context);
    }

    private String buildAuthMessage(boolean success, String maskedUsername, String maskedAddress, String authMethod) {

OUT=$(./mc cp --quiet --recursive "${ALIAS_NAME}"/"${BUCKET}"/initial-data/ "${DEST_DIR}"/)
RET=${?}
if [ ${RET} -ne 0 ]; then
	# It is a success scenario as get objects should fail
	echo "GET objects failed as expected"
	echo "script passed" >resiliency-verify-failure.log
	exit 0
else
	echo "GET objects expected to fail, but succeeded: ${OUT}"

		t.Run("", func(t *testing.T) {
			_, err := parsePostPolicyForm(strings.NewReader(testCase.policy))
			if testCase.success && err != nil {
				t.Errorf("Expected success but failed with %s", err)
			}
			if !testCase.success && err == nil {
				t.Errorf("Expected failed but succeeded")
			}
		})
	}
}

type formValues struct {
	http.Header
}

func newFormValues() formValues {