-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 7
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
Add extraManifests value #27
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
thanks for offering the help! some last polishings and we're good!
Done with the requested changes |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
thanks!
@@ -143,3 +143,12 @@ extraServicePorts: [] | |||
|
|||
# global variables to use in values. typically used in tests. | |||
global: {} | |||
|
|||
# extra manifests to deploy with the helm chart | |||
extraManifests: [] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Shouldn't this be extraManifests: {}
to match the object
type?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
PR welcome and merged quickly to fix any mistakes! One way even more ideal is to add ci tests as we have for some other options, but I'll leave that up to the person to decide to do or not.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@marcuz no, array is correct. If you want to be more accurate you can change it to be array of objects [ {} ]
.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yeah, the fix in #32 seems to work. 😄
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
thanks @marcuz and @CiucurDaniel. If either of you have time to add a fake value in a ci file, please do, so that the mystery stays solved https://github.com/openzipkin/zipkin-helm/tree/master/charts/zipkin/ci
that or add the linting not currently happening to our workflow config
https://github.com/openzipkin/zipkin-helm/blob/master/.github/workflows/test.yml#L72
This PR implements #26