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

👻 Add CSV annotations #324

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jun 13, 2024
Merged

Conversation

jmontleon
Copy link
Member

I am not certain about this one. Can others weigh in:

features.operators.openshift.io/proxy-aware

Specify whether an Operator supports running on a cluster behind a proxy by accepting the standard HTTP_PROXY and HTTPS_PROXY proxy environment variables. If applicable, the Operator passes this information to the workload it manages (operands).

Copy link

@rayfordj rayfordj left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

/lgtm

Thanks!

@jmontleon jmontleon force-pushed the add-annotations branch 2 times, most recently from 414e7fb to 3aca35a Compare June 6, 2024 15:58
@jmontleon jmontleon added this to the v0.5.0 milestone Jun 6, 2024
Copy link
Contributor

@shawn-hurley shawn-hurley left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I have a minor concern that is probably outside the scope of this PR.

We should just do that as a follow on if we decide we are actually fine

features.operators.openshift.io/cni: "false"
features.operators.openshift.io/csi: "false"
features.operators.openshift.io/disconnected: "true"
features.operators.openshift.io/fips-compliant: "false"
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Why are we not designed for fips? Maybe we just need to do the exercise to make sure, but I think we should. @dymurray thoughts?

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@shawn-hurley , I don't know about "designed for", but we've not yet configured downstream to build to run on FIPS enabled clusters. Until that is done, we should continue to claim "false" for its value. Franco has a task configure and build MTA (7.0.z & 7.1.z) for it , but it is lower priority than other efforts around MTA at the moment.

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

FWIW, we're already injecting this in downstream CSV. This PR just brings the change more visibility and the two CSVs closer parity

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Heard, I just know that a certain class of customers that we probably want to support will only use fips-compliant stuff, so I want to make sure that we can support those folks. If this is tracked elsewhere, then let's go ahead and ignore this for now :)

Signed-off-by: Jason Montleon <jmontleo@redhat.com>
@jmontleon jmontleon merged commit fc12bfb into konveyor:main Jun 13, 2024
9 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants