SECURESIGN-1342 | Unable to delete upgraded Securesign object

[JasonPowr]

The validation rules I removed here were stopping deletion after an upgrade, I tried to configure new rules however it just would not work reliable, validation for this particular rule is still done inside the controller here: https://github.com/securesign/secure-sign-operator/blob/main/internal/controller/tsa/utils/tsa_cert_chain.go#L238

[osmman]

Hi, I am thinking about making tsa optional in Securesign resource, by changing it to pointer. https://github.com/securesign/secure-sign-operator/blob/main/api/v1alpha1/securesign_types.go#L35

TimestampAuthority *TimestampAuthoritySpec `json:"tsa,omitempty"`

@JasonPowr @bouskaJ What do you think?

[JasonPowr]

Hi, I am thinking about making tsa optional in Securesign resource, by changing it to pointer. https://github.com/securesign/secure-sign-operator/blob/main/api/v1alpha1/securesign_types.go#L35

TimestampAuthority *TimestampAuthoritySpec `json:"tsa,omitempty"`

@JasonPowr @bouskaJ What do you think?

Off the Top of my head, I can't see any major issue with this, making it a pointer, if I understand correctly may allow for a nil value so I should be able to do some better api validation with it, but I will let @bouskaJ comment before making changes.

[bouskaJ]

yes, I don't see any issue. @JasonPowr go ahead.

[openshift-ci]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: JasonPowr, osmman

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• OWNERS [JasonPowr,osmman]

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

[JasonPowr]

/test tas-operator-e2e