🌱 OPRUN-4077: Remove the kustomize config

[tmshort]

Add a helm/OWNERS file (copied from config/OWNERS) Update hack/tools/update-crds.sh to not reference config directory

Description

Reviewer Checklist

• API Go Documentation
• Tests: Unit Tests (and E2E Tests, if appropriate)
• Comprehensive Commit Messages
• Links to related GitHub Issue(s)

[netlify]

✅ Deploy Preview for olmv1 ready!

Name	Link
🔨 Latest commit	37adc45
🔍 Latest deploy log	https://app.netlify.com/projects/olmv1/deploys/68d3668c96a28e0008a8683f
😎 Deploy Preview	https://deploy-preview-2213--olmv1.netlify.app
📱 Preview on mobile	Toggle QR Code... Use your smartphone camera to open QR code link.

---

To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify project configuration.

[tmshort]

/hold
This will seriously break the downstream bumper, because the manifest source will have changed, and the code to handle the new config is in a late carry commit. This might trigger us to consolidate all the carry commits (something that we acknowledge we have to do occasionally).

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 71.87%. Comparing base (47f8d31) to head (37adc45).
⚠️ Report is 2 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #2213   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   71.87%   71.87%           
=======================================
  Files          86       86           
  Lines        8474     8474           
=======================================
  Hits         6091     6091           
  Misses       1982     1982           
  Partials      401      401           

Flag	Coverage Δ
e2e	39.18% <ø> (+0.11%)	⬆️
experimental-e2e	46.17% <ø> (ø)
unit	56.91% <ø> (-0.02%)	⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

[camilamacedo86]

Why do we actually need the base?
It feels more like a kustomize-style layout.

Since everything is already managed under Helm, why wouldn’t those manifests live under templates instead?
Also, I noticed we have CRDs under templates — shouldn’t this be consistent?

[tmshort]

The base directory is storing the output of the CRDs - these is the "raw" CRDs. This is kept outside of the templates directory and is purposely not put into a crds directory.

Because the CRDs are be conditionally included into the manifest (i.e. standard vs experimental), and because they are autogenerated, and because we don't want to go through a messy process of post-processing them to include Helm directives, they are put into that base directory.

So, the CRDs are not under templates directory, but instead those files in the templates/crds directory conditionally include CRDs from the base directory:

operator-controller/helm/olmv1/templates/crds/customresourcedefinition-clustercatalogs.olm.operatorframework.io.yml

Lines 1 to 9 in 16d1089

	{{- if .Values.options.catalogd.enabled }}
	{{- if (eq .Values.options.featureSet "standard") }}
	{{ tpl (.Files.Get "base/catalogd/crd/standard/olm.operatorframework.io_clustercatalogs.yaml") . }}
	{{- else if (eq .Values.options.featureSet "experimental") }}
	{{ tpl (.Files.Get "base/catalogd/crd/experimental/olm.operatorframework.io_clustercatalogs.yaml") . }}
	{{- else }}
	{{- fail "options.featureSet must be set to one of: {standard,experimental}" }}
	{{- end }}
	{{- end }}

operator-controller/helm/olmv1/templates/crds/customresourcedefinition-clusterextensionrevisions.olm.operatorframework.io.yml

Lines 1 to 9 in 16d1089

	{{- if .Values.options.operatorController.enabled }}
	{{- if (eq .Values.options.featureSet "standard") }}
	{{- /* Add when GA: tpl (.Files.Get "base/operator-controller/crd/standard/olm.operatorframework.io_clusterextensionrevisionss.yaml") . */}}
	{{- else if (eq .Values.options.featureSet "experimental") }}
	{{ tpl (.Files.Get "base/operator-controller/crd/experimental/olm.operatorframework.io_clusterextensionrevisions.yaml") . }}
	{{- else }}
	{{- fail "options.featureSet must be set to one of: {standard,experimental}" }}
	{{- end }}
	{{- end }}

(i.e. We don't want to do any post-processing of the CRDs to include the above.)

This PR, because it's removing the config directory, is merely changing the location of where the "raw" CRDs live. It is NOT changing the process of how they are generated nor included into the Helm manifest.

[tmshort]

/unhold
/approve

[openshift-ci]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: tmshort

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• OWNERS [tmshort]

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

[dtfranz]

Should we address these as well while we're at it?

Makefile:

KUSTOMIZE_STANDARD_OVERLAY := config/overlays/standard
KUSTOMIZE_STANDARD_E2E_OVERLAY := config/overlays/standard-e2e
KUSTOMIZE_EXPERIMENTAL_OVERLAY := config/overlays/experimental
KUSTOMIZE_EXPERIMENTAL_E2E_OVERLAY := config/overlays/experimental-e2e

These urls will need to be updated too so they don't break:
docs/draft/api-reference/network-policies.md:

* The catalogd NetworkPolicy is implemented [here](https://github.com/operator-framework/operator-controller/blob/main/config/base/catalogd/manager/network_policy.yaml).
* The operator-controller is implemented [here](https://github.com/operator-framework/operator-controller/blob/main/config/base/operator-controller/manager/network_policy.yaml).

[dtfranz]

/lgtm