-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.8k
feat(chart): optional sidecar on webhook #5586
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
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.
Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
Welcome @aceeric! |
Hi @aceeric. Thanks for your PR. I'm waiting for a kubernetes-sigs member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the I understand the commands that are listed here. Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository. |
/ok-to-test |
At first glance, I do not see the interest to add an option for only one person in the world. But maybe I missed something. |
FYI this was discussed when the chart was first updated to support the sidecar and it was decided to to support this. I'll second the request to open an issue if you want to discuss this, for architectural changes we much prefer an issue over a PR for this. @mloiseleur correct me if I'm wrong but I think ExternalDNS does support this if you provide your own manifests? |
I have no strong preferences here, will completely defer the decision on if we want to support his in helm. |
@mloiseleur what do you think? |
@stevehipwell This is a valid and interesting use case. It seems there are now two known users with this needs. /hold cancel |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm not sure that provider.webhook.sidecar
as a boolean is the best API design for this. Personally I think we should redesign the webhook
API to look more like the following with the sidecar values moved under sidecar (and the old values deprecated).
provider:
name:
webhook:
readTimeout:
writeTimeout:
url:
sidecar:
image:
repository:
tag:
pullPolicy:
When in webhook mode, if the provider.webhook.url
value is set then the --webhook-provider-url
flag can be overridden otherwise the current sidecar logic can be applied.
@stevehipwell just to confirm - basically all of the keys under the current
Just confirming before making the mod thanks. |
a291f9c
to
e0fce4e
Compare
Folks - I've made the requested mods. (Re-based on master.) Also: I fixed the Helm schema generation as discussed in this issue. |
@aceeric we need to keep the old values unless we want to make this a breaking change, I think we probably want to keep this as just a patch even if we release a breaking change for the next binary release. |
@stevehipwell Thank you. I think you're saying to revert the PR to the initial commit wherein the change was (essentially) non-breaking. E.g. values from:
To:
Please confirm, thank you. |
@aceeric I'm saying the existing values need to be kept but deprecated, with the new pattern overriding the old. |
@stevehipwell Thanks. Supporting both current and new values together will require the chart to handle four use cases. Even though one use case is still not supported the chart still needs to be able to differentiate among them.
One way to do this is to introduce a new variable under the new sidecar variable:
The implementation then would be:
In summary - out of the box the chart will prefer the new sidecar vars but the deprecated functionality can be enabled by setting the sidecar variable to null. Please let me know your thoughts or recommend an alternate approach. Thanks again. |
@aceeric you should be able to use functions like |
@stevehipwell Thank you. Then the logic to include or exclude the sidecar container will be:
|
@aceeric I'd suggest adding a new |
@stevehipwell giving it another go... |
de09ea5
to
333f098
Compare
What does it do ?
It's possible to run the webhook outside the cluster. See #5585.
Motivation
In my particular environment, I run the webhook outside the cluster and so the webhook sidecar is un-needed.
More