fix: Handle log4j2 not being yaml (#110)

[sastorsl]

Bump chart (#110)

Signed-off-by: Stein Arne Storslett sastorsl@users.noreply.github.com

Description

Render log4j2.properties properly when added to values.yaml / config.
The current version does a toYaml, but log4j2 is key = value based and not yaml so without this PR log4j2 will not be rendered properly (see issue for details).

Maintainers may adjust the Chart version as needs be, ie. to align with other PR's but please contact me for any other changes.

Issues Resolved

#110

Check List

• Commits are signed per the DCO using --signoff

By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the Apache 2.0 license.
For more information on following Developer Certificate of Origin and signing off your commits, please check here.

[peterzhuamazon]

Looks like version bump needs to be higher?

[DandyDeveloper]

@sastorsl Wouldn't this be better to just tpl <Value> . rather then this? The toYaml may be redundant.

[sastorsl]

Looks like version bump needs to be higher?

A bit hard to determine from the outside, given that there are a few PR's, and thus conflicts.
@peterzhuamazon could a solution be that you in the team name a version number and I'll add it?

[TheAlgo]

Seeing the current scenario I feel we can start off with long lived release branches. If everyone is okay with it I can create one. We can have those branches merged to main after the patch is ready so one and so forth.

Reference : #79

[sastorsl]

@sastorsl Wouldn't this be better to just tpl <Value> . rather then this? The toYaml may be redundant.

@DandyDeveloper I was really trying to not change how the chart handled config files, trying to avoid those regressions...
The PR I submitted "only" changes the handling of log4j2.properties and thus does not change anything else.

tpl docs are quite terse, and I see that there has been some issues with regards to tpl and the use of range, i.e. helm/helm#5979
I did a couple of tests and was at least not able to find a solution in a satisfactory time frame.

I would think (hope) that rewriting to use tpl could be in scope further down the road for somebody more well versed in it's use, and I hope that we can move forward with this PR as it stands.

[peterzhuamazon]

@sastorsl DCO check fail because pulling from main will not sign.
You need to sign again after pulling.

Thanks.

[sastorsl]

@peterzhuamazon I've resolved the DCO-issue now.

[peterzhuamazon]

For some reason it is keep pointing to 5a963b9daeaf3d89f5856366df1f6e8fc730e4ba

[sastorsl]

I'm removing this PR and replacing it with a clean one (#123).
Sorry for the mess...