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

chore: Introduce Azure Workload Identity in CI matrix #265

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Apr 26, 2022

Conversation

tomkerkhove
Copy link
Member

Introduce Azure Workload Identity in CI matrix to ensure it renders correctly

Checklist

  • Commits are signed with Developer Certificate of Origin (DCO - learn more)

Relates to kedacore/keda#2487
Relates to #263

Introduce Azure Workload Identity in CI matrix to ensure it renders correctly

Signed-off-by: Tom Kerkhove <kerkhove.tom@gmail.com>
@tomkerkhove tomkerkhove requested a review from a team as a code owner April 26, 2022 11:26
@tomkerkhove
Copy link
Member Author

CI is failing, which is expected. Time to merge #264

Copy link
Member

@JorTurFer JorTurFer left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

❤️

@v-shenoy
Copy link
Contributor

v-shenoy commented Apr 26, 2022

I think the CI will fail even after #264 is merged.

> helm install keda ./keda --set podIdentity.azureWorkload.enabled=true                                        
Error: INSTALLATION FAILED: unable to build kubernetes objects from release manifest: error validating "": error validating data: [unknown object type "nil" in ServiceAccount.metadata.annotations.azure.workload.identity/client-id, unknown object type "nil" in ServiceAccount.metadata.annotations.azure.workload.identity/tenant-id]

This is from local when I tried. It works when specifying the client and tenant ids. Which is good I would say, it prevents the user from enabling workload identity without specifying these values.

I think you would need to add some dummy client and tenant ids.

@tomkerkhove
Copy link
Member Author

I think the CI will fail even after #264 is merged.

That is intended indeed, I want to verify it first.

Signed-off-by: Tom Kerkhove <kerkhove.tom@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Tom Kerkhove <kerkhove.tom@gmail.com>
@tomkerkhove tomkerkhove merged commit 9b56a3b into main Apr 26, 2022
@tomkerkhove tomkerkhove deleted the workload-identity branch April 26, 2022 11:59
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants