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

Remove selfSignedCertSecretName property #15878

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Feb 26, 2020
Merged

Remove selfSignedCertSecretName property #15878

merged 2 commits into from
Feb 26, 2020

Conversation

mmorhun
Copy link
Contributor

@mmorhun mmorhun commented Jan 30, 2020

Signed-off-by: Mykola Morhun [email protected]

What does this PR do?

Reduces number of tls secrets in Che installation process.
Actually we may use the same certificate, but treat it differently depending on self-signed flag.

What issues does this PR fix or reference?

#15810
Should be merged together with che-incubator/chectl#476

@mmorhun mmorhun self-assigned this Jan 30, 2020
@che-bot che-bot added status/code-review This issue has a pull request posted for it and is awaiting code review completion by the community. kind/task Internal things, technical debt, and to-do tasks to be performed. labels Jan 30, 2020
@che-bot
Copy link
Contributor

che-bot commented Jan 30, 2020

✅ E2E Happy path tests succeed 🎉

See Details

Tested with Eclipse Che Multiuser User on K8S (minikube v1.1.1)

@che-bot
Copy link
Contributor

che-bot commented Jan 30, 2020

E2E tests of Eclipse Che Multiuser on OCP has been successful:

Copy link
Member

@sleshchenko sleshchenko left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Good simplification! 👍

@che-bot
Copy link
Contributor

che-bot commented Jan 31, 2020

Can one of the admins verify this patch?

@tolusha tolusha mentioned this pull request Feb 2, 2020
35 tasks
@mmorhun
Copy link
Contributor Author

mmorhun commented Feb 4, 2020

Rebased

@che-bot
Copy link
Contributor

che-bot commented Feb 4, 2020

✅ E2E Happy path tests succeed 🎉

See Details

Tested with Eclipse Che Multiuser User on K8S (minikube v1.1.1)

@che-bot
Copy link
Contributor

che-bot commented Feb 4, 2020

E2E tests of Eclipse Che Multiuser on OCP has failed:

@sleshchenko sleshchenko requested a review from metlos February 5, 2020 09:10
@sleshchenko
Copy link
Member

@metlos Please review the latest commit 4adf9a9

Copy link
Member

@sleshchenko sleshchenko left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Still LGTM after my commit ;)

@che-bot
Copy link
Contributor

che-bot commented Feb 5, 2020

❌ E2E Happy path tests failed ❗

See Details

Tested with Eclipse Che Multiuser User on K8S (minikube v1.1.1)

⚠️ https://github.com/orgs/eclipse/teams/eclipse-che-qa please check this report.

ℹ️ Use comment "crw-ci-test" to rerun happy path E2E test.

@che-bot
Copy link
Contributor

che-bot commented Feb 5, 2020

E2E tests of Eclipse Che Multiuser on OCP has failed:

@sleshchenko
Copy link
Member

ci-build

Copy link
Contributor

@metlos metlos 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 the change on the condition for propagating the TLS secret is not correct.

optional: false
{{- end }}

# If workspaces are created in a separate precreated namespace
# then configure Che Server to propagate TLS secret to workspaces' namespaces
{{- if not (contains "<" .Values.global.cheWorkspacesNamespace) }}
{{- if contains "<" .Values.global.cheWorkspacesNamespace }}
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

So originally, before we had placeholders in namespace names, this test was merely "if the namespace is different than the default one". With the introduction of placeholders, we changed the condition to "if this is a static, precreated, namespace". Reverting that condition as you suggest, would actually mean "if this is either a precreated namespace using a placeholder (e.g. <username>-che) or a namespace we create (e.g. <workspaceid>-che)".

So I don't think this change is actually valid. At the same time I agree the test is insufficient :) We need to capture the "precreatedness" of the namespaces here and I am afraid we cannot capture that by merely detecting the placeholders in the name.

Maybe just actually give up and introduce global.namespacePrecreated?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I wrote a lot of words and thought about the behavior we need here, but then just removed everything because I got to a conclusion that Che Server must be configured with TLS certs to propagate always if it's different than Che Server one...

We introduce placeholders and some conditions in helm chart and they are valid for ServiceAccounts, Roles, and RoleBindings... But what is the reason not to propagate TLS secret for WorkspaceIngresses?... At this stage, I believe that they must be propagated always if workspaces are not deployed in the same namespace as Che is because only in that case workspaces are not able to reuse Che Server's one...
Hope I described my thought quite clearly. Let me fix condition as I described and then we'll continue discussing it

@mmorhun
Copy link
Contributor Author

mmorhun commented Feb 5, 2020

I've just tested the latest changes and everything worked as supposed to.
At least for my deployment case.

@che-bot
Copy link
Contributor

che-bot commented Feb 5, 2020

✅ E2E Happy path tests succeed 🎉

See Details

Tested with Eclipse Che Multiuser User on K8S (minikube v1.1.1)

@che-bot
Copy link
Contributor

che-bot commented Feb 5, 2020

✅ E2E Happy path tests succeed 🎉

See Details

Tested with Eclipse Che Multiuser User on K8S (minikube v1.1.1)

@che-bot
Copy link
Contributor

che-bot commented Feb 5, 2020

E2E tests of Eclipse Che Multiuser on OCP has failed:

@SkorikSergey
Copy link
Contributor

Selenium tests execution on Eclipse Che Multiuser on OCP (https://ci.codenvycorp.com/job/che-pullrequests-test-ocp/3558//Selenium_20tests_20report/) doesn't show any regression against this Pull request.

@tolusha
Copy link
Contributor

tolusha commented Feb 17, 2020

@mmorhun
Can we merge?

@mmorhun
Copy link
Contributor Author

mmorhun commented Feb 17, 2020

@tolusha no, we cannot, because this should be merged together with che-incubator/chectl#476, which is better to merge after the upcoming release.

@tolusha tolusha mentioned this pull request Feb 17, 2020
46 tasks
@SkorikSergey
Copy link
Contributor

[ci-test]

@mmorhun mmorhun merged commit 579cb67 into master Feb 26, 2020
@mmorhun mmorhun deleted the che-15810 branch February 26, 2020 09:26
@che-bot che-bot added this to the 7.10.0 milestone Feb 26, 2020
@che-bot che-bot removed the status/code-review This issue has a pull request posted for it and is awaiting code review completion by the community. label Feb 26, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
kind/task Internal things, technical debt, and to-do tasks to be performed.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

7 participants