Adding long lived SA token option (#917)

[gillcaleb]

Addresses #917

The intent of this PR is to allow for the creation of a long-lived API token for the server SA.

[hashicorp-cla]

All committers have signed the CLA.

[gillcaleb]

It's unclear to my why the license/cla check continues to remain in a pending state as I've gone through the signing process and verified its completion on my end. I've tried re-checking it numerous times but to no avail.

[heatherezell]

It's unclear to my why the license/cla check continues to remain in a pending state as I've gone through the signing process and verified its completion on my end. I've tried re-checking it numerous times but to no avail.

Usually that happens if your contributions are under a different account, ie, email. For example, I see that @stavvy-cgill is making the comments, but @gillcaleb is the commenter here. Try signing with your @stavvy-cgill account and that should fix it. Thanks!

[stavvy-cgill]

It's unclear to my why the license/cla check continues to remain in a pending state as I've gone through the signing process and verified its completion on my end. I've tried re-checking it numerous times but to no avail.

Usually that happens if your contributions are under a different account, ie, email. For example, I see that @stavvy-cgill is making the comments, but @gillcaleb is the commenter here. Try signing with your @stavvy-cgill account and that should fix it. Thanks!

Thank you!

[gillcaleb]

Hi team! Just wanted to check back in to get a sense for when this might get a review. Thanks!

[tomhjp]

Thanks for raising this - I'm ok with adding it but I want to make sure Kubernetes' alternative recommendations are made clear. LGTM once a few naming and documentation comments are addressed. Thanks for including the tests and schema update too!

[gillcaleb]

Thanks for raising this - I'm ok with adding it but I want to make sure Kubernetes' alternative recommendations are made clear. LGTM once a few naming and documentation comments are addressed. Thanks for including the tests and schema update too!

Appreciate the feedback! I went ahead and added the suggested changes.

[kaibepperling]

Thanks for opening the PR @gillcaleb! We ran in to the same thing today and were about to open a PR.
Is anything blocking a release of that change?

[tomhjp]

Sorry for the delay revisiting this - and thanks for addressing the comments. The changes look good to me, except we just need a very mechanical replacement of generateSecret with createSecret in a few places to match up with the latest name in values.yaml.

[tomhjp]

LGTM, thanks! I'll wait for the acceptance tests to pass and then merge.