-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 39
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
Conversation
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.
/lgtm
Thanks!
414e7fb
to
3aca35a
Compare
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 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" |
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.
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?
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.
@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.
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.
FWIW, we're already injecting this in downstream CSV. This PR just brings the change more visibility and the two CSVs closer parity
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.
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>
3aca35a
to
6d10ba8
Compare
I am not certain about this one. Can others weigh in: