[helm] pass service annotations through helm tpl engine

[jkroepke]

What this PR does / why we need it:

We have serval situation where we have to put the ingress FQDN as service annotation, for example service.beta.kubernetes.io/azure-pls-fqdns. I would like to re-use the values for the ingress object on the service annotation, too. Grafana supports this pattern on the ingress object, too.

Types of changes

• Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
• New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
• CVE Report (Scanner found CVE and adding report)
• Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to change)
• Documentation only

Which issue/s this PR fixes

How Has This Been Tested?

Checklist:

• My change requires a change to the documentation.
• I have updated the documentation accordingly.
• I've read the CONTRIBUTION guide
• I have added unit and/or e2e tests to cover my changes.
• All new and existing tests passed.

[k8s-ci-robot]

This issue is currently awaiting triage.

If Ingress contributors determines this is a relevant issue, they will accept it by applying the triage/accepted label and provide further guidance.

The triage/accepted label can be added by org members by writing /triage accepted in a comment.

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository.

[k8s-ci-robot]

Hi @jkroepke. Thanks for your PR.

I'm waiting for a kubernetes member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with /ok-to-test on its own line. Until that is done, I will not automatically test new commits in this PR, but the usual testing commands by org members will still work. Regular contributors should join the org to skip this step.

Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the ok-to-test label.

I understand the commands that are listed here.

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository.

[longwuyuan]

@jkroepke Thanks.

• Would it be possible for you to create a issue and link that issue here
• The hope is that the issue contains real and detailed data
• If you can use a kind cluster or a minikube cluster and a sample deployment using image like nginx:alpine
• If you can show kubectl describe outputs for the controller, app, ingress etc
• If you can show the curl command used to demo the problem

[jkroepke]

@longwuyuan

Can you please re-confirm, if the steps are nessesary for a change on the helm chart. The steps from your post are new to me and compared to recent pull requests not nessesary.

In case, this is the new process, please confirm the step

If you can use a kind cluster or a minikube cluster and a sample deployment using image like nginx:alpine

I dont get the use case for this step and the change on the helm chart here. I also let you know, that the CI of ingress-nginx already deploy this change on a KIND cluster.

Please let know, if all the steps are required for an size/S change.

[longwuyuan]

@jkroepke thanks for the contribution apologies if my comments appear more like getting in the way.

It seems you are introducing change to template only and there is a description of where this change can be useful also. So my first suggestion is a demonstrated use of the new template. Hence my request for creating a new issue so a reader can know what is not possible with the current template.

Secondly, diving into provider's specific annotations is a rabbit hole and already multiple questions have come in on the functional details of the "internal" LoadBalancer. So if you copy/pasted a actual use of the new templating here, it would not require a maintainer to spend time diving into it. Hence the request for the deployment and curl etc.

And these are my opinions and not a new process. Maybe I am over expecting so we can wait for other comments.

[jkroepke]

@longwuyuan #10099 created.

[jkroepke]

@longwuyuan I created an issue for this PR. Can we proceed here? I would appreicate an review here (@cpanato @strongjz)

[jkroepke]

@tao12345666333 Could you take here a look? I would much appreciate it.

[jkroepke]

@longwuyuan I would appreciate a review here soon

[strongjz]

/lgtm
/cherry-pick release-1.8

[k8s-infra-cherrypick-robot]

@strongjz: once the present PR merges, I will cherry-pick it on top of release-1.8 in a new PR and assign it to you.

In response to this:

/lgtm
/cherry-pick release-1.8

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository.

[k8s-ci-robot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: jkroepke, strongjz

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:

• charts/ingress-nginx/OWNERS [strongjz]

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

[k8s-infra-cherrypick-robot]

@strongjz: new pull request created: #10229

In response to this:

/lgtm
/cherry-pick release-1.8

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository.