docs: validating webhook

[JorTurFer]

New validation hook to check if scale target is already managed

Checklist

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

Relates to kedacore/keda#4001
Relates to kedacore/keda#3755
Relates to kedacore/keda#3087
Relates to kedacore/keda#3083
Relates to #1030

[netlify]

✅ Deploy Preview for keda ready!

Name	Link
🔨 Latest commit	002a03c
🔍 Latest deploy log	https://app.netlify.com/sites/keda/deploys/63bc09e6c4a016000893c111
😎 Deploy Preview	https://deploy-preview-1027--keda.netlify.app
📱 Preview on mobile	Toggle QR Code... Use your smartphone camera to open QR code link.

---

To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify site settings.

[tomkerkhove]

@JorTurFer Is this doc related to kedacore/keda#4001 (comment)?

[tomkerkhove]

It looks like it

[tomkerkhove]

I did a first skim.

I think it's a good start, but would:

1. Rename everything to "Admission Controller" which is a known concept
2. Restructure things a bit for upcoming rules that we already have on the backlog
3. Update the image to also use "Admission Controller"
4. Introduce a section under "Concepts" that talks about the feature on what it is and how it helps, while the "operate" section can be a listing of how to opt-in, configure certs and give detailed overview of prevention rules

[JorTurFer]

4. Introduce a section under "Concepts" that talks about the feature on what it is and how it helps, while the "operate" section can be a listing of how to opt-in, configure certs and give detailed overview of prevention rules

I'm not sure if this makes sense, I mean, the feature is too small and has a single responsibility, maybe in the future this takes more entity, but for the moment I wouldn't put at the same as those things

[tomkerkhove]

4. Introduce a section under "Concepts" that talks about the feature on what it is and how it helps, while the "operate" section can be a listing of how to opt-in, configure certs and give detailed overview of prevention rules

I'm not sure if this makes sense, I mean, the feature is too small and has a single responsibility, maybe in the future this takes more entity, but for the moment I wouldn't put at the same as those things

But yet it is a core component of KEDA so we should cover it imo

[JorTurFer]

PTAL @tomkerkhove
I have moved the page from operate to concepts. TBH, I don't have enough content to have a real page if I split into concepts and operate.
For properly explaining how to use custom certs (in depth, not just the overview) I have created this issue to track it because I have to change also the cert generation in the operator/ms to use the same approach as the webhooks and I prefer to do all at once (just to clarify, I'm going to do it after finishing the webhooks feature).

[tomkerkhove]

Looking very good, thank you!

Added a few suggestions, but I believe we should split the concept document and move some information to a new operate doc.

[tomkerkhove]

PTAL @tomkerkhove Tom Kerkhove FTE I have moved the page from operate to concepts. TBH, I don't have enough content to have a real page if I split into concepts and operate. For properly explaining how to use custom certs (in depth, not just the overview) I have created this issue to track it because I have to change also the cert generation in the operator/ms to use the same approach as the webhooks and I prefer to do all at once (just to clarify, I'm going to do it after finishing the webhooks feature).

That's OK and I like it more this way. I have made a suggestion, however, to split the pages anyway as they are targeting different audiences but I hope my example explains it better - Happy to discuss over call if it helps.

[tomkerkhove]

LGTM, just added some small nits.

Please also update https://github.com/kedacore/keda-docs/blob/main/schematics.pptx which we should use in favor of the one in the code repo as it feels more related here than there. Thoughts? I would remove it from code repo as well.

[JorTurFer]

Done! PTAL

[tomkerkhove]

LGTM, feel free to merge when feature is merged

[tomkerkhove]

Please also update main/schematics.pptx which we should use in favor of the one in the code repo as it feels more related here than there. Thoughts? I would remove it from code repo as well.

@JorTurFer I think you did it the other way around :D I would keep the file here and remove it from kedacore/keda (code repo) since it is unlikely that we'll need it much there compared to here

[JorTurFer]

@JorTurFer I think you did it the other way around :D I would keep the file here and remove it from kedacore/keda (code repo) since it is unlikely that we'll need it much there compared to here

that's what I did, I updated the file here and removed from keda repo

[tomkerkhove]

Nevermind me; it's a 95% delete and not a complete delete - Sorry.

[JorTurFer]

Nevermind me; it's a 95% delete and not a complete delete - Sorry.

Binary diffs xD