feat(dockerExecute): Infer Kubernetes securityContext from dockerOptions

[pbusko]

Changes

The dockerExecute step will take securityContext relevant arguments from dockerOptions and pass it to the dockerExecuteOnKubernetes

• Tests
• Documentation

[pbusko]

/it

[anilkeshav27]

if i understand the PR correctly, we introduce a new step level configuration at the container level to have securitContext which then be passed to dockerExecute -> dockerExecuteOnKuberenetes as a example:

cnbBuild:
     containers:
          securityContext : 

however this configuration is only jenkins specific since its related to dockerExecuteOnKubernetes and will confuse end users who might add the same configuration and expect it to run on azure / github actions

rather than that, we can have a common solutions since we already have the possibility to provide the user / group via the dockerOptions .

dockerExecute is aware of dockerOptions and we can choose security context related metadata and pass it to dockerExecuteOnKubernetes since securityContext is a parameter for dockerExecuteOnKubernetes .

this will simplify the location of adding root users and will be a common solution for jenkins/github actions / azure task

for e.g in azure task we already pass the dockerOptions to the underlying azure task and we could do same for jenkins as well i.e

Decide (pick and choose only security context related params) the security context related parameters here

and pass the selected security context when calling dockerExecuteOnKubernetes here

[c0d1ngm0nk3y]

and will confuse end users who might add the same configuration and expect it to run on azure / github actions

But why would this be any less confusing? Most of the dockerOptions have no effect, but some would get parsed and have magically meaning.

[pbusko]

@anilkeshav27 could you please review the PR? We implemented changes as requested.

[CCFenner]

Thanks, looks good so far 👍

[pbusko]

/it

[pbusko]

/it

[loewenstein]

/it

[anilkeshav27]

lgtm to me , we could run only the go integration test with /it-go ,

[loewenstein]

@anilkeshav27 the Go integration tests seem to be fine and a review from you and/or @CCFenner is all I can see that's missing.

[loewenstein]

Thanks @anilkeshav27 and @CCFenner. Are you going to do the merge?

cc @c0d1ngm0nk3y @pbusko

[sonarqubecloud]

Kudos, SonarCloud Quality Gate passed!   

0 Bugs
0 Vulnerabilities
0 Security Hotspots
0 Code Smells

No Coverage information
No Duplication information

[CCFenner]

/it-go