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

feat: Support filtering annotations allowlist by "*" #2234

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Nov 9, 2023
Merged

feat: Support filtering annotations allowlist by "*" #2234

merged 1 commit into from
Nov 9, 2023

Conversation

xonvanetta
Copy link
Contributor

What this PR does / why we need it:
Same as #1823. Thought this was done on both allowlist since they are the same type but this wasn't the case. Added support for both now.

Support filtering label allowlist by "*", which will expand to the enabled resources, while inferring their values based on its value(s).

How does this change affect the cardinality of KSM: No change.

@linux-foundation-easycla
Copy link

linux-foundation-easycla bot commented Oct 30, 2023

CLA Signed

The committers listed above are authorized under a signed CLA.

  • ✅ login: xonvanetta / name: Fabian Heib (e4d2bd4)

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added cncf-cla: no Indicates the PR's author has not signed the CNCF CLA. needs-triage Indicates an issue or PR lacks a `triage/foo` label and requires one. labels Oct 30, 2023
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

Welcome @xonvanetta!

It looks like this is your first PR to kubernetes/kube-state-metrics 🎉. Please refer to our pull request process documentation to help your PR have a smooth ride to approval.

You will be prompted by a bot to use commands during the review process. Do not be afraid to follow the prompts! It is okay to experiment. Here is the bot commands documentation.

You can also check if kubernetes/kube-state-metrics has its own contribution guidelines.

You may want to refer to our testing guide if you run into trouble with your tests not passing.

If you are having difficulty getting your pull request seen, please follow the recommended escalation practices. Also, for tips and tricks in the contribution process you may want to read the Kubernetes contributor cheat sheet. We want to make sure your contribution gets all the attention it needs!

Thank you, and welcome to Kubernetes. 😃

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files. cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. and removed cncf-cla: no Indicates the PR's author has not signed the CNCF CLA. labels Oct 30, 2023
@CatherineF-dev
Copy link
Contributor

/lgtm

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Nov 2, 2023
@CatherineF-dev
Copy link
Contributor

CatherineF-dev commented Nov 2, 2023

Robot asked me to

/assign @mrueg

internal/store/builder.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Resolves: add-wilcard-allowlist-annotations
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot removed the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Nov 2, 2023
@dashpole
Copy link

dashpole commented Nov 2, 2023

/triage accepted

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added triage/accepted Indicates an issue or PR is ready to be actively worked on. and removed needs-triage Indicates an issue or PR lacks a `triage/foo` label and requires one. labels Nov 2, 2023
Desc string
AnnotationsAllowlist map[string][]string
EnabledResources []string
Wanted LabelsAllowList
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

should this be

Suggested change
Wanted LabelsAllowList
Wanted AnnotationsAllowList

?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Well, It reuses the same type from the test above here. I could declare a new type and point it to options.LabelsAllowList, while at it should I change this to a more generic also?

I noticed that these two tests test the same function in the end, I wrote tests first then went to implement, remove the test or keep it?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Ah I didn't know AnnotatiosAllowList don't exist. I think we can keep it for this change like this. :)

@mrueg
Copy link
Member

mrueg commented Nov 9, 2023

/lgtm

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Nov 9, 2023
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: CatherineF-dev, mfld, mrueg, xonvanetta

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

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Nov 9, 2023
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot merged commit 4e431f6 into kubernetes:main Nov 9, 2023
12 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files. triage/accepted Indicates an issue or PR is ready to be actively worked on.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants