Proposal: initiate rollback if --atomic is set and SIGINT is received

[harryjsmith]

Sometimes, during a helm upgrade --atomic, I will notice that something has gone wrong which is going to cause the upgrade to fail. Rather than having to wait for the duration of the timeout period in order to have Helm perform the rollback, it would be useful if an initial ctrl+c/SIGINT triggered the rollback, rather than just killing the process dead and leaving things in a bad state. Perhaps a second ctrl+c/SIGINT sent in succession could additionally be used to indicate that the user would like to stop the process immediately.

[bacongobbler]

Please feel free to take a look into this and let us know what you find.

[lindhe]

@harryjsmith Yeah, I've thought about this too! Definitely how one wants the application to work. I've looked on it briefly. Considering that the wait seems to be happening here, I assume we should listen for the the SIGINT signal in this function.

That part looks fairly easy (except that I'm not familiar with signalling in Go). However, it might be tricky if we want different behavior from --atomic and --wait since --atomic implies wait and the existing logic really only considers the --wait case.

[github-actions]

This issue has been marked as stale because it has been open for 90 days with no activity. This thread will be automatically closed in 30 days if no further activity occurs.

[lindhe]

Hi. I'd like this issue to not go stale, please github-actions bot...

[github-actions]

This issue has been marked as stale because it has been open for 90 days with no activity. This thread will be automatically closed in 30 days if no further activity occurs.

[invidian]

not stale

[github-actions]

This issue has been marked as stale because it has been open for 90 days with no activity. This thread will be automatically closed in 30 days if no further activity occurs.