Update Konflux CEL expressions #250
Conversation
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: JasonPowr 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 |
| @@ -7,7 +7,8 @@ metadata: | |||
| build.appstudio.redhat.com/pull_request_number: '{{pull_request_number}}' | |||
| build.appstudio.redhat.com/target_branch: '{{target_branch}}' | |||
| pipelinesascode.tekton.dev/max-keep-runs: "3" | |||
| pipelinesascode.tekton.dev/on-cel-expression: event == "pull_request" && target_branch == "main" | |||
| pipelinesascode.tekton.dev/on-cel-expression: | | |||
| event == "pull_request" && target_branch == "main" && (".tekton/rhtas-operator-pull-request.yaml".pathChanged() || "api/***".pathChanged() || "config/***".pathChanged() || "controllers/***".pathChanged() || "Dockerfile.rhtas-operator.rh".pathChanged() || "go.mod".pathChanged() || "main.go".pathChanged() ) | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't love this, since it won't catch new files or directories at the root. But I'm not sure what is a better way to handle it. You might add go.sum and Makefile to this list.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I get what your saying, but at the same time if a new directory or file is introduced that affects the build of the operator, there would be changes in the directories listed in the expression to reflect whatever changes are needed.
I've added go.sum and Makefile :)
JasonPowr
force-pushed
the
update-cel-expressions
branch
from
be8f280 to
11e6382
Compare
|
/lgtm |
This pr makes changes to the tekton cel expressions, this makes sure that the fbc images, the bundle and the operator can build independently.
Explanation (Copied from slack)
"I think having the operator and the bundle in the same application in Konflux causes some issues.When we generate an image for the operator-controller in Konflux, we then go back and update the bundle. When we update the bundle it generates a new image for the operator-controller, this means that when we release we use a snapshot that has an up to date controller image, but the image being used in the bundle isn’t the one in the snapshot, it's the one generated previously. If we were to separate them into different applications they could be built independently, wdyt? Or probably a better solution would be to add the cel expression to the operator pipelines?"