Support trusted provider hostnames for Pipelines as Code
Maintainers usually reply within 1 day
Assessment
- Difficulty
- 4/5
- Estimated time
- 3-5 days
- Newbie friendliness
- 50/100
- Issue type
- Feature
- Clarity
- Mostly clear
- Activity status
- Quiet
- Tech stack
- go, kubernetes
- Domain
- devops, infrastructure
Research direction
Start after tektoncd/pipelines-as-code#2871 is released, then inspect the vendored Settings conversion and reconciliation paths for primary and additional controllers. Review the bundled manifests and additional-controller RBAC resources, and add coverage for settings retention, scoped ConfigMap permissions, and annotation preservation. Done means the acceptance criteria pass and TektonConfig, OpenShiftPipelinesAsCode, and upgrade behavior are documented.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Description
Problem
Pipelines as Code PR tektoncd/pipelines-as-code#2871 introduces an administrator-owned trusted-provider-hostnames setting and allows each controller to record authenticated, publicly routable self-hosted providers in the pipelinesascode.tekton.dev/auto-trusted-provider-hostnames ConfigMap annotation.
This operator work should begin after that PAC PR is merged and the change is available in a PAC release.
The operator rebuilds PAC ConfigMap data through PAC's vendored Settings type and creates additional PAC controllers from a filtered copy of the primary manifest. Updating only the PAC images/manifests would leave two integration gaps:
- An operator version using an older PAC
Settingstype cannot round-triptrusted-provider-hostnamesthrough theOpenShiftPipelinesAsCodeorTektonConfigsettings. - Additional controllers use their own ConfigMaps but do not currently receive scoped
update/patchpermission for those ConfigMaps, so they cannot record learned hostnames.
Proposed work
- After tektoncd/pipelines-as-code#2871 merges, bump the PAC dependency and bundled release manifests to a release containing it.
- Ensure
trusted-provider-hostnamesis accepted and preserved in the primary and additional controllersettingsmaps. - Give every enabled additional controller scoped
updateandpatchaccess to its own ConfigMap. Prefer a Role and RoleBinding owned with that additional controller's resources. - Verify operator reconciliation preserves the controller-owned
pipelinesascode.tekton.dev/auto-trusted-provider-hostnamesannotation. - Document configuration through
TektonConfigandOpenShiftPipelinesAsCode, including the upgrade requirement for self-hosted providers using per-repository or incoming webhooks.
Example primary-controller configuration:
spec:
platforms:
openshift:
pipelinesAsCode:
settings:
trusted-provider-hostnames: "ghe.example.com,gitlab.example.com"
Acceptance criteria
- The PAC dependency and manifests contain tektoncd/pipelines-as-code#2871.
- Primary and additional controller settings retain
trusted-provider-hostnamesafter defaulting and reconciliation. - Each additional controller can patch only its configured ConfigMap for learned-host annotation updates.
- Operator reconciliation does not remove the learned-host annotation.
- Tests cover settings conversion, additional-controller RBAC, and annotation preservation.
- Operator documentation explains configuration and upgrade behavior.
- Dominant language
- Go
- Stars
- 606
- Forks
- 270
- Avg merge
- 1d 7h
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 159
Getting set up
- No Dockerfile or Docker Compose file
- Has a pull request template
- Read the contributing guide
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
More from tektoncd/operator
-
Difficulty 1/5 Under an hour Newbie friendliness 82/100
Maintainers usually reply within 1 day
-
kind/feature
Difficulty 4/5 Over a week Newbie friendliness 30/100
tektoncd/operator#4275 · 3 comments ·
Maintainers usually reply within 1 day
-
kind/feature
Difficulty 5/5 Over a week Newbie friendliness 30/100
tektoncd/operator#3977 · 2 comments · 3 reactions ·
Maintainers usually reply within 1 day
-
kind/feature
Difficulty 5/5 Over a week Newbie friendliness 35/100
tektoncd/operator#3922 · 2 comments · 1 reaction ·
Maintainers usually reply within 1 day
-
Difficulty 5/5 Over a week Newbie friendliness 42/100
tektoncd/operator#3845 · 2 reactions ·
Maintainers usually reply within 1 day
All issues in tektoncd/operator
Similar issues
-
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 68/100
dragonflydb/dragonfly-operator#619 ·
Maintainers usually reply within 2 days
-
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 67/100
cloudfoundry/bosh-bootloader#701 · 1 comment ·
-
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 76/100
-
baremetal: private network check rejects offer-specific options (Private Network 10Gbps / 25Gbps)Possibly taken @lbarrosby claimed this today. Open
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 70/100
scaleway/terraform-provider-scaleway#4587 ·
Maintainers usually reply within 1 day
-
blocked-needs-validation bug
Difficulty 1/5 Under an hour Newbie friendliness 78/100
projectcapsule/capsule#2280 ·
Maintainers usually reply within 1 day