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

Unpack job security updates #2805

Conversation

perdasilva
Copy link
Collaborator

@perdasilva perdasilva commented Jun 21, 2022

Moves the unpacker job role policy creating to its own method to make downstream patching easier and less dangerous

Signed-off-by: perdasilva <perdasilva@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: perdasilva <perdasilva@redhat.com>
@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. label Jun 21, 2022
@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Jun 21, 2022
@perdasilva perdasilva force-pushed the unpack_job_security_updates_2 branch 2 times, most recently from 0442f78 to 0275c0d Compare June 22, 2022 09:43
@perdasilva perdasilva changed the title [WIP] Unpack job security updates #2 Unpack job security updates #2 Jun 22, 2022
@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot removed the do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. label Jun 22, 2022
@perdasilva perdasilva changed the title Unpack job security updates #2 Unpack job security updates Jun 22, 2022
@perdasilva perdasilva force-pushed the unpack_job_security_updates_2 branch from 0275c0d to b349543 Compare June 22, 2022 09:50
"",
},
Verbs: []string{
"get", "update",
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Do we need to create the configmap to unpack the bundles?

Assuming that we are testing it on the ci and all is passing that seems that we do not need it.
Then, the changes shows fine for me

/approved
/lgtm

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Jun 22, 2022
Copy link
Contributor

@camilamacedo86 camilamacedo86 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think we need to ensure that we do need to create verb.
Otherwise, the changes shows fine for me

@openshift-ci
Copy link

openshift-ci bot commented Jun 22, 2022

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: camilamacedo86, perdasilva

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:

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

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot merged commit e568cde into operator-framework:master Jun 22, 2022
perdasilva added a commit to perdasilva/operator-lifecycle-manager that referenced this pull request Jun 23, 2022
perdasilva added a commit to perdasilva/operator-lifecycle-manager that referenced this pull request Jun 23, 2022
This reverts commit e568cde.

Signed-off-by: perdasilva <perdasilva@redhat.com>
perdasilva added a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 23, 2022
* Revert "Unpack job security updates (#2805)"

This reverts commit e568cde.

Signed-off-by: perdasilva <perdasilva@redhat.com>

* Revert "Update unpack job pod security (#2793)"

This reverts commit eedad28.

Signed-off-by: perdasilva <perdasilva@redhat.com>

* Revert "Update CatalogSource Pod security context (#2782)"

This reverts commit 99b51e7.

Signed-off-by: perdasilva <perdasilva@redhat.com>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants