feat: configure excluded propagate labels/annotations

[erikgb]

This PR proposes an implementation of #53. I have tried to keep changes to a minimum though it seems like the code could benefit from some simple refactorings after this change.

I struggled to find good names for the new config props, so please let me know if you have better suggestions!

The change is theoretically not 100% backwards compatible, as strings.Contains(k, "kubernetes.io/") will potentially exclude more than path.Match("*kubernetes.io/*", key), but IMO it should give the same results for typical labels, at least https://kubernetes.io/docs/concepts/overview/working-with-objects/common-labels/.

Closes #53

[zoetrope]

I struggled to find good names for the new config props, so please let me know if you have better suggestions!

I think the current name works fine, but how about simplifying it to excludeLabelKeys, excludeAnnotationKeys?

The change is theoretically not 100% backwards compatible, as strings.Contains(k, "kubernetes.io/") will potentially exclude more than path.Match("kubernetes.io/", key), but IMO it should give the same results for typical labels, at least https://kubernetes.io/docs/concepts/overview/working-with-objects/common-labels/.

No problem at all.

[erikgb]

I struggled to find good names for the new config props, so please let me know if you have better suggestions!

I think the current name works fine, but how about simplifying it to excludeLabelKeys, excludeAnnotationKeys?

I looked in that direction, but I fear some confusion with the existing labelKeys/annotationKeys which denotes labels/annotations on namespaces - which is a quite different configuration. Maybe @ymmt2005 has some input here?

[ymmt2005]

@erikgb @zoetrope
Thank you for fixing the issue.

I agree that exclucdeLabelKeys would be confusing, and I'm fine with Eric's suggestion.

[zoetrope]

@erikgb @ymmt2005
Alright, let's merge it as is.