Update traefik's CRDs

[consideRatio]

To update Traefik's CRDs is a breaking change that requires manual intervention from users with an existing installation of the dask-gateway helm chart, due to that, I want to update them to the latest version before release.

[dhirschfeld]

I'll just mention, in case you haven't already seen, the CRDs can be updated with e.g.

kubectl apply --server-side --force-conflicts -k https://github.com/traefik/traefik-helm-chart/tree/v19.0.4/traefik/crds

xref: traefik/traefik-helm-chart#649

Copying locally might still be easier for your users though.

[consideRatio]

Thanks @dhirschfeld!

[consideRatio]

@dhirschfeld do you grasp if --server-side --force-conflicts makes sense to suggest overall when doing kubectl apply of the bundled CRDs?

      --server-side=false: If true, apply runs in the server instead of the client.
      --force-conflicts=false: If true, server-side apply will force the changes against conflicts.

[dhirschfeld]

TBH, I'm no expert here and I don't really have a good grasp on the differences between a server-side and a normal apply.

My understanding of --force-conflicts is that it will allow making changes to existing fields which we'd definitely want to do here. I'm not too sure when you'd want an apply to not make changes - maybe if an apply was supposed to only add new fields and not update any existing ones having the update error might be useful.

This doc has a pretty good/understandable explanation:

• https://kubernetes.io/docs/reference/using-api/server-side-apply/

...and doing some more research brought up this blog which has a bit more context:

• https://opensource.googleblog.com/2021/10/server-side-apply-in-kubernetes.html

It sounds like it's supposed to be a new, better (show diffs, detect conflicts, ???) way to do a kubectl apply

[consideRatio]

Thanks for helping out with the learning process, I'm leaning towards thinking we should suggest both --server-side and --force-conflicts

[dhirschfeld]

I'm leaning towards thinking we should suggest both --server-side and --force-conflicts

I think that's the way to go also