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

INSIGHTS-159 - use go templating instead of custom function validation #1056

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Jun 27, 2024

Conversation

vitorvezani
Copy link
Member

This PR fixes #

Checklist

  • I have signed the CLA
  • I have updated/added any relevant documentation

Description

What's the goal of this PR?

  • use go templating instead of custom function validation
  • this removes the need of custom validation function support

What changes did you make?

What alternative solution should we consider, if any?

Copy link

Fairwinds Insights Scan Results

View the full report at insights.fairwinds.com.

✅ No new Action Items detected!

Copy link
Member

@sudermanjr sudermanjr left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Super cool.

@vitorvezani vitorvezani enabled auto-merge (squash) June 27, 2024 20:00
@vitorvezani vitorvezani merged commit 8b236c2 into master Jun 27, 2024
5 of 6 checks passed
@vitorvezani vitorvezani deleted the use-go-templating-instead-fn/vv/INSIGHTS-159 branch June 27, 2024 20:02
vitorvezani added a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 27, 2024
#1056)

* use go templating instead of custom function validation

* fix changelog
vitorvezani added a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 27, 2024
* fix typo

* fix failure message

* fix changelog

* fix missingPodDisruptionBudget validation

* Update failure.empty-labels.yaml

* Update failure.no-metadata.yaml

* INSIGHTS-159 - use go templating instead of custom function validation (#1056)

* use go templating instead of custom function validation

* fix changelog
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants