[stable/ambassador] Make ports configuration flexible to allow for TCPMapping ports

[iNoahNothing]

Signed-off-by: Noah Krause krausenoah@gmail.com

What this PR does / why we need it:

Resolves: emissary-ingress/emissary#1672

This PR changes the service configuration from relying on .Values.service.http(s) to using a range to assign any port in the .Value.service.ports list.

Special notes for your reviewer:

This PR is part of a list of breaking changes I would like to make to the helm chart and is not intended to be accepted as is.

@Flydiverny I would like your opinion on this change. There is a way to accomplish what I want without removing the current functionality by just keeping the service.http(s) as is and adding the service.ports only for extra ports. That would make this no longer a breaking change but the UX is less desirable.

Should breaking changes like the one I am proposing be avoided at all cost regardless of the UX experience?

Checklist

[Place an '[x]' (no spaces) in all applicable fields. Please remove unrelated fields.]

• DCO signed
• Chart Version bumped
• Variables are documented in the README.md
• Title of the PR starts with chart name (e.g. [stable/chart])

[k8s-ci-robot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: nbkrause

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• stable/ambassador/OWNERS [nbkrause]

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

[k8s-ci-robot]

Hi @nbkrause. Thanks for your PR.

I'm waiting for a helm member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with /ok-to-test on its own line. Until that is done, I will not automatically test new commits in this PR, but the usual testing commands by org members will still work. Regular contributors should join the org to skip this step.

Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the ok-to-test label.

I understand the commands that are listed here.

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository.

[Flydiverny]

I think making breaking change here can make sense. Introducing more options in a non breaking just adds to confusion. While sure it could work here to just have additionalPorts list. But if defaults are same (if that's still sane) and the change is documented why not :)

I won't be able to try this myself until later next week (on vacation :D)

[Flydiverny]

/hold

Just doing this as its not intended to be merged as the only breaking change :)

[Flydiverny]

Does this however do the same as .additionalTCPPorts or should it superseed that as well?

[iNoahNothing]

@Flydiverny You are correct, it looks like .additionalPorts covers most of this however, it does not allow you to set the nodePort for the port which could be an issue for some users.

I also think it says something that I did not notice the .additionalPorts config. While it technically solves the problem, I think from a UX perspective, the separation can cause confusion.

Thank you for the input. I am going to start drafting a major release today that will include changes laid out here as well as in #14388 and #14944

[stale]

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. Any further update will cause the issue/pull request to no longer be considered stale. Thank you for your contributions.

[stale]

This issue is being automatically closed due to inactivity.