Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add ability to pass Capabilities.APIVersions to template and lint #3377

Closed
mattfarina opened this issue Jan 23, 2018 · 8 comments · Fixed by #5392
Closed

Add ability to pass Capabilities.APIVersions to template and lint #3377

mattfarina opened this issue Jan 23, 2018 · 8 comments · Fixed by #5392
Labels

Comments

@mattfarina
Copy link
Collaborator

When using the template and lint commands the Capabilities.APIVersions is an empty set because it uses defaults which are currently an empty set. Might be good to provide a set or provide the capability to pass in a set.

Note, lint doesn't let you pass in the version of k8s either. That may also be useful.

@munnerz
Copy link
Contributor

munnerz commented Jan 24, 2018

I've recently discovered the new helm template command (wooo!)

I've used it to automatically generate some 'default' deployment manifests for cert-manager for users that wish to not use Helm. I've also created a verify script, to ensure these manifests are up to date during our CI process.

We use Capabilities to determine whether to use CRDs or TPRs. We could soon remove that check however, but in the meantime it'd be great if I could do something to make this return true:

{{- if .Capabilities.APIVersions.Has "apiextensions.k8s.io/v1beta1" -}}

jetstack-ci-bot added a commit to cert-manager/cert-manager that referenced this issue Jan 25, 2018
Automatic merge from submit-queue. If you want to cherry-pick this change to another branch, please follow the instructions <a href="https://github.com/kubernetes/community/blob/master/contributors/devel/cherry-picks.md">here</a>.

Generate and publish deployment manifests for cert-manager

**What this PR does / why we need it**:

This adds scripts to automatically generate deployment manifests for cert-manager.
This allows us to keep the helm chart as the authoritative source of truth, but still publish an alternate deployment mechanism.

If the Helm chart changes, or any of the values files change, the developer submitting the PR will need to run `./hack/update-deploy-gen.sh`. CI automatically verifies these files are up to date.

As a result of this, and due to helm/helm#3377, I have removed support for TPR creation in the Helm chart based on server capabilities. CRDs have been present since 1.7, and we do not test against 1.6 so I propose we drop support unless the user configures it manually. Besides, there's currently no way to disable the ClusterIssuer control loop meaning cert-manager doesn't run on 1.6 anyway (#201).

**Which issue this PR fixes**:

Fixes #272 

**Release note**:
```release-note
Provide static deployment manifests as an alternative to a Helm chart based deployment
```

/cc @f-f @whereisaaron
@fejta-bot
Copy link

Issues go stale after 90d of inactivity.
Mark the issue as fresh with /remove-lifecycle stale.
Stale issues rot after an additional 30d of inactivity and eventually close.

If this issue is safe to close now please do so with /close.

Send feedback to sig-testing, kubernetes/test-infra and/or fejta.
/lifecycle stale

@fejta-bot
Copy link

Stale issues rot after 30d of inactivity.
Mark the issue as fresh with /remove-lifecycle rotten.
Rotten issues close after an additional 30d of inactivity.

If this issue is safe to close now please do so with /close.

Send feedback to sig-testing, kubernetes/test-infra and/or fejta.
/lifecycle rotten
/remove-lifecycle stale

@kramvan1
Copy link

+1

@drewwells
Copy link

@thomastaylor312 this issue also mentions lint. The PR only addressed template

@genofire
Copy link
Contributor

Yes linting is still not solved (but needed)

@avneesh91
Copy link

Is there an alternative for this or making link bypass this?

@genofire
Copy link
Contributor

genofire commented Jul 9, 2024

there is #10190 but also closed

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

9 participants