ROX-30034,ROX-29995,ROX-29996: New admission controller options: fail…#16149
ROX-30034,ROX-29995,ROX-29996: New admission controller options: fail…#16149clickboo merged 1 commit intomasterstackrox/stackrox:masterfrom boo-roxctl-adm-ctrl-new-optionsstackrox/stackrox:boo-roxctl-adm-ctrl-new-optionsCopy head branch name to clipboard
Conversation
|
Images are ready for the commit at 81c97ed. To use with deploy scripts, first |
Codecov Report❌ Patch coverage is Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #16149 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 48.85% 48.84% -0.01%
==========================================
Files 2611 2611
Lines 192812 192841 +29
==========================================
+ Hits 94189 94200 +11
- Misses 91206 91224 +18
Partials 7417 7417
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
0137455 to
b0d55fc
Compare
e5679db to
5ad4fe3
Compare
|
regarding
I don't see Helm changes in this PR? |
I've tagged you on the relevant section in the PR - look out for my comments. |
8657f42 to
fa93bb9
Compare
7d5cbc2 to
278d4b7
Compare
838e6de to
781889b
Compare
The file and these defaults have always existed and so has the code logic. If they were always wrong, I do not know - it is for teams working on Helm(install team) and senseco to figure it out since it falls under your area of expertise and responsibility. I changed the defaults on this file to match the defaults in roxctl (which I also changed) - I believe that to be correct. Hence I am dismissing the review.
If you still think the values file is an issue, I recommend you file an appropriate task under the epics you are working on to make modifications based on your subject matter expertise. I do not believe it makes sense to block this PR on that future work.
mclasmeier
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
As discussed, would be nice IMHO to make the deprecation warnings more concise.
460d59c to
81c97ed
Compare
…ure policy and enforcement opt out.
Description
@pedrottimark Keeping you in the loop for proto changes.
@mclasmeier Would like you to review the Helm changes for sure, if not all the changes.
@kcarmichael08 Keeping you in the loop for context on subsequent doc changes that will be needed.
Note: I am aware of the need for backport for this PR. I am ironing out some details based on this related PR to figure which backport labels to add (also will need to remove feature flag, and I await the reviewers thoughts on this)
User-facing documentation
Testing and quality
Automated testing
How I validated my change
roxctl bundle generation with option combinations (enforce options old and new, and the new failure policy option) to ensure correct bundle generation. Results as expected.