operator: patch back in the checksum field into the flux crds#14265
operator: patch back in the checksum field into the flux crds#14265RafalKorepta merged 1 commit intoredpanda-data:devfrom
Conversation
| - path: patches/webhook_in_clusters.yaml | ||
| - path: patches/webhook_in_redpanda_consoles.yaml | ||
| - path: patches/webhook_in_cluster.redpanda.com_topics.yaml |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
NIT: This movement break the kubebuilder (I think). If in the future you would like to add new webhook configuraiton it will end up here (before +kubebuilder:scaffold:crdkustomizewebhookpatch line).
For anyone that would look at this file it would be hard to understand if patches where added manually or by kubebuilder.
| apiVersion: kustomize.config.k8s.io/v1beta1 | ||
| kind: Kustomization | ||
|
|
||
| #+kubebuilder:scaffold:crdkustomizeresource |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
NIT: The same comment as with patches. Kubebuilder can be confused if we would like to add new resource later via kubebuilder cli.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Oh, I know what happened. I did a kustomize edit fix and it reorganized. I'll open a PR to move these back where they belong.
| # and the spec.versions.v1beta2.schema.openAPIV3Schema.properties.status.properties.includedArtifacts.items.properties.checksum property | ||
| # that was removed | ||
| - op: add | ||
| path: /spec/versions/1/schema/openAPIV3Schema/properties/status/properties/artifact/properties/checksum |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm afraid of the numbers like 0 or 1. If we change the order we will end up in the same situation.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Unfortunately, that's the choice the jsonpatch project made. We have no choice. Luckily, kubebuilder does build the crd with the versions in the same order. If upstream removes a version, however, that will break this.
RafalKorepta
left a comment
RafalKorepta
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
To unblock our user I'm giving LGTM, but it's hard to maintain Flux CRDs if we have different maintenance policy.
The checksum was removed from the previous definition by fluxcd/source-controller#1056. This is breaking change for the end user and we can see more of that.
You can see https://github.com/fluxcd/source-controller/pull/1056/files#r1150474148 comment that it was done by design.
|
/backport v23.2.x |
Yes it was, but it doesn't break anything to have a field defined in the CRD that you don't use. |
Yes, every time old version is changed we need to do double check. If customer have flux CRDs already installed in K8S cluster then we have breaking change. We are competing with upstream flux CRDs. |
4 participants
Backports Required
Release Notes