Skip to content
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

fix: Apply workaround for jaeger rbac permissions #109

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jul 29, 2024

Conversation

viccuad
Copy link
Member

@viccuad viccuad commented Jul 29, 2024

Description

Relates to kubewarden/helm-charts#492

Apply workaround for the jaeger ClusterRole, that seems to be missing permissions to list ingressclasses. This makes the jaeger operator not reconcile the expected ingress service. See
jaegertracing/helm-charts#549

Test

Tested locally.

Additional Information

Tradeoff

Potential improvement

@viccuad viccuad requested a review from a team as a code owner July 29, 2024 10:38
@viccuad viccuad self-assigned this Jul 29, 2024
Apply workaround for the jaeger ClusterRole, that seems to be missing
permissions to list ingressclasses. This makes the jaeger operator not
reconcile the expected ingress service. See
jaegertracing/helm-charts#549

Signed-off-by: Víctor Cuadrado Juan <[email protected]>
@viccuad viccuad force-pushed the workaround-jaeger-rbac branch from 8acbbea to f5dcf72 Compare July 29, 2024 10:47
@viccuad
Copy link
Member Author

viccuad commented Jul 29, 2024

Note, this happens at least for jaeger-operator-2.54.0 chart, yet it does not happen for the chart version we use in docs.kubewarden.io.

Hence why I'm only concerned about a workaround for the e2e tests.

@jvanz
Copy link
Member

jvanz commented Jul 29, 2024

Note, this happens at least for jaeger-operator-2.54.0 chart, yet it does not happen for the chart version we use in docs.kubewarden.io.

Hence why I'm only concerned about a workaround for the e2e tests.

We need to update the docs then. Because in the dependency matrix we state that we support the jaeger operator helm chart appVersion >= 1.49 < 2. And the 2.54.0 chart version is valid. The appVersion there is 1.57.0 version

@viccuad
Copy link
Member Author

viccuad commented Jul 29, 2024

I thought so, but it seems the chart column is fine. For jaeger-operator it is appVersion >= 1.49 < 2, version example 2.49.0. And the latest jaeger-operator is appVersion1.57.0 (within bounds).

@jvanz
Copy link
Member

jvanz commented Jul 29, 2024

I thought so, but it seems the chart column is fine. For jaeger-operator it is appVersion >= 1.49 < 2, version example 2.49.0. And the latest jaeger-operator is appVersion1.57.0 (within bounds).

Oh, yeah. That's fine. I've misunderstood what you said. As I said in our quick chat in other channel, I missed the upstream bug that is out of our control. Everything should be fine in our side. So, this is fine and good to go.

Copy link
Member

@jvanz jvanz left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

@viccuad viccuad merged commit 53d73a7 into kubewarden:main Jul 29, 2024
1 check passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
Archived in project
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants