(feat): Add Pipelines-as-Code on Kubernetes; resolve openshift-pipelines/pipelines-as-code to tektoncd repo#3337
(feat): Add Pipelines-as-Code on Kubernetes; resolve openshift-pipelines/pipelines-as-code to tektoncd repo#3337mbpavan wants to merge 1 commit intotektoncd:mainfrom
Conversation
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. DetailsNeeds approval from an approver in each of these files:Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
|
Caution There are some errors in your PipelineRun template.
|
|
/kind feature |
5551ab6 to
5cb4ff9
Compare
|
@mbpavan Overall looks good
|
Thanks @jkhelil for helm chart, I will do, good catch |
| - On Kubernetes | ||
| - [TektonDashboard](./TektonDashboard.md) | ||
| - [OpenShiftPipelinesAsCode](./OpenShiftPipelinesAsCode.md) (installed via `spec.platforms.kubernetes.pipelinesAsCode`; same CRD/kind as on OpenShift) | ||
| - On OpenShift |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Please consider revisiting this section. The content is reduntant. Please check teh doc here - https://tekton.dev/docs/operator/tektonaddon/ addon right now is intentionally opnshift only.. with this PR we are making that as well kuberenetes, which will increase the scope of work downstream and upstream.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Regarding tektonaddon, as you correctly pointed out that its for OCP addons, I have removed PAC to be part of tektonaddon and with the docs look good with that change
| case *v1alpha1.ManualApprovalGate: | ||
| return filepath.Join(koDataDir, "manual-approval-gate") | ||
| case *v1alpha1.OpenShiftPipelinesAsCode: | ||
| return filepath.Join(koDataDir, "tekton-addon/pipelines-as-code") |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
IMHO PAC should not be a sub-directory of tekton-addon please consider fixing this
| }, | ||
| v1alpha1.ProfileBasic: { | ||
| Deployments: []string{ | ||
| "pipelines-as-code-controller", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Do we need PAC for Basic profile & Lite profile?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I checked and currently for OCP we do not add it as a part of any profile as well and let us keep it that way as of now.
| *config.Spec.Platforms.OpenShift.PipelinesAsCode.Enable { | ||
| pacEnabled = true | ||
| } | ||
| if config.Spec.Platforms.Kubernetes.PipelinesAsCode != nil && |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What is the user attempts to do spec.openshift.PipelinesAsCode as well as spec.kubernetes.PipelinesasCode? Do we have validation to allow only either of them? Also if we set as kuberenetes, it should work on both OPenshift and kubernetes? Is there any logic that will work only if it is set to Openshift?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Added webhook validation now
anithapriyanatarajan
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@mbpavan - This PR also enables support of tekton addons upstream. Please update PR description and commit accordingly, if that is intended.
Also, please include tests to https://github.com/mbpavan/operator/blob/main/pkg/reconciler/common/releases_test.go since we are making changes to releases.go.
5cb4ff9 to
7b56a7c
Compare
98bbbe7 to
c639656
Compare
…ipelines-as-code to tektoncd repo
16782dd to
5662ad2
Compare
I have added helm chart changes now |
you are right, now tektonadd is not enalbed upstream with the new commit |
Changes
Enable Pipelines-as-Code (PAC) on vanilla Kubernetes in the Tekton Operator, aligned with the tektoncd/pipelines-as-code GitHub repo while keeping the canonical Go module path github.com/openshift-pipelines/pipelines-as-code.
Submitter Checklist
These are the criteria that every PR should meet, please check them off as you
review them:
make test lintbefore submitting a PRSee the contribution guide for more details.
Release Notes