karmada operator: change karmada system namespace to karmada-system

[calvin0327]

What type of PR is this?
/kind feature

What this PR does / why we need it:

Change the karmada controlplane system namespace to karmada-system. keep the same behavior with chart and karmadactl.

Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
Fixes #

Special notes for your reviewer:

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?:

NONE

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

Patch coverage has no change and project coverage change: -0.02% ⚠️

Comparison is base (8d1a800) 53.84% compared to head (c422952) 53.83%.
Report is 2 commits behind head on master.

❗ Your organization needs to install the Codecov GitHub app to enable full functionality.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #3750      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   53.84%   53.83%   -0.02%     
==========================================
  Files         231      231              
  Lines       23062    23062              
==========================================
- Hits        12418    12415       -3     
- Misses       9967     9970       +3     
  Partials      677      677              

Flag	Coverage Δ
unittests	53.83% <ø> (-0.02%)	⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

see 1 file with indirect coverage changes

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[Poor12]

Does this also mean that the namespace is not configurable? Must be karmada-system?

[calvin0327]

Does this also mean that the namespace is not configurable? Must be karmada-system?

@Poor12 Indeed, the karmadaSystemNamespace should be a configurable variable. I dont's know where is the best place to configure it, karmada operator flag? or karmada CR?

[Poor12]

From my perspective, I think the namespace of components should be the same with the namespace of Karmada CR.

[calvin0327]

From my perspective, I think the namespace of components should be the same with the namespace of Karmada CR.

@Poor12 If so, the system namespace of karmada instance seems to be different.

[Poor12]

Yeah, in that way, the namespace of default Karmada CR should be karmada-system. And I don‘t think it's possible for Karmada's components to exist in multiple namespaces at the same time.

[calvin0327]

In my scenario, we create a karmada named e2etest-instancedefaulto6z and in namespace e2etest-instancedefaulto6z.

[root@master ~]# kubectl get karmada -A
NAMESPACE                    NAME                         READY   AGE
e2etest-instancedefaulto6z   e2etest-instancedefaulto6z   True    29m

And we access the karmada controlplane:

It is same with karmada cr of namespace, so, the system namespace of every karmada instance is different.
So, I think it's better to keep all karmada instance system namespace the same.

@Poor12 @lonelyCZ

[calvin0327]

@RainbowMango @jwcesign Do you have any comments?

[RainbowMango]

The following two places still referencing the names with data.GetNamespace, I guess should be updated accordingly, right?

karmada/operator/pkg/tasks/init/karmadaresource.go

Line 75 in 8d1a800

return fmt.Errorf("failed to create namespace %s, err: %w", data.GetNamespace(), err)

karmada/operator/pkg/tasks/init/karmadaresource.go

Line 78 in 8d1a800

klog.V(2).InfoS("[systemName] Successfully created karmada system namespace", "namespace", data.GetNamespace(), "karmada", klog.KObj(data))

[calvin0327]

Yes, that's right. the namespace message of these logs should be consistent.
updated, thanks.

[RainbowMango]

/lgtm
/approve

[karmada-bot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: RainbowMango

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:

• operator/OWNERS [RainbowMango]

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