Replace break function in pod-launcher-rolebinding.yaml

[guan404ming]

Related Issue

• closes Error: UPGRADE FAILED: parse error at (airflow/templates/rbac/pod-launcher-rolebinding.yaml:66): function "break" not defined #49206

Why

The Airflow Helm chart currently uses the break function in chart/templates/rbac/pod-launcher-rolebinding.yaml which lead to error since break is not defined

How

The PR replaces the break function usage with alternative control flow mechanisms in pod-launcher-rolebinding.yaml

---

^ Add meaningful description above
Read the Pull Request Guidelines for more information.
In case of fundamental code changes, an Airflow Improvement Proposal (AIP) is needed.
In case of a new dependency, check compliance with the ASF 3rd Party License Policy.
In case of backwards incompatible changes please leave a note in a newsfragment file, named {pr_number}.significant.rst or {issue_number}.significant.rst, in airflow-core/newsfragments.

[eladkal]

Is there a way to test this to avoid regression?

[guan404ming]

These are a few of my current thoughts:

• adding a pre-commit check in the CI to detect incompatible features (e.g., the break function) in all Helm templates?
• to mark features in the documentation or code that require a specific Helm version, so developers and users are clear on compatibility requirements?

Do you have any hints or suggestions?

[eladkal]

These are a few of my current thoughts:

• adding a pre-commit check in the CI to detect incompatible features (e.g., the break function) in all Helm templates?
• to mark features in the documentation or code that require a specific Helm version, so developers and users are clear on compatibility requirements?

Do you have any hints or suggestions?

Don't we have a test that tries to upgrade the helm chart version? Such test would have caught the issue as the upgrade would fail

[guan404ming]

It seems like there's currently no test for this, but I feel like my Helm knowledge is a bit limited at the moment. Would it be okay to open another issue to address the test later?

[guan404ming]

Thanks for the review!