Adds Contour package

[skriss]

What this PR does / why we need it

This PR is a WIP that adds a Contour package.

Which issue(s) this PR fixes

N/A

Describe testing done for PR

Basic manifest generation with ytt -f addons/packages/contour/bundle/config/ and deployment in a KinD cluster.

Special notes for your reviewer

This is a WIP, looking to get any initial feedback from both @shyaamsn and TCE folks on how I've approached this. I started from the existing packaging in tkg-extensions and made a number of removals/modifications. A few specific questions I have:

• tkg-extensions had a values.star that among other things defined validation functions for the values.yaml. I didn't see any *.star files in the TCE repo so I omitted this for now. Question is, does it make sense to bring those over into TCE?
• Contour takes a YAML config file, which is usually provided via config map. Instead of templating each individual field in that YAML config file like tkg-extensions did, I just pull the entire YAML block from values.yaml into the ConfigMap via overlay. From my perspective this is easier to maintain going forward, and the templating seemed to be just adding an extraneous layer. Thoughts on this approach?
• tkg-extensions had a few different kapp annotations applied to various objects (the namespace, configmap, and Envoy service IIRC); I removed those because I wasn't sure they were necessary for TCE, but if they are, please let me know.

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?

TODO

[skriss]

hey folks just a reminder that I'm looking for some feedback on approach here (TCE maintainers and @shyaamsn). I've rebased to get rid of the extraneous commits that came up from main.

[seemiller]

@skriss To answer your questions:

• .star files - You are correct that TCE does not have any .star files. However, I don't see any problem introducing them.
• values.yaml - I'm always a proponent of doing the simplest thing that works. We are still figuring out how to go about all this ourselves. I'm ok with the approach that you're taking. If we need to adjust in the future, we will.
• app annotations - Honestly, I'm not sure about this one.

If you feel the package is ready to be pushed up to Harbor, let me know and I can do that (I'll get the SHA that will address that TODO in main.yaml)

[skriss]

Thanks for the feedback @seemiller! Will review and and update soon.

[skriss]

@seemiller I noticed that the contour-operator add-on uses a Bundle name of contour (https://github.com/vmware-tanzu/tce/blob/main/addons/packages/contour-operator/bundle/.imgpkg/bundle.yml#L4), which is what I'd like to use for contour itself. Is it OK to just change contour-operator's Bundle name to contour-operator? If so, I can put up a PR for it.

[seemiller]

Good catch, yes, that should be changed to contour-operator

[shyaamsn]

LGTM

[skriss]

If you feel the package is ready to be pushed up to Harbor, let me know and I can do that (I'll get the SHA that will address that TODO in main.yaml)

@seemiller I've updated this to our latest Contour patch release version, and I think it's in reasonable shape as a first cut. If the next step is pushing stuff to Harbor, then I think it's OK to go ahead with that. What else do I need to do from here? Also, is there a doc that explains how to do a version bump of Contour for future reference?

[seemiller]

@skriss I'll get it packaged and push it up later this morning.

Funny you should ask about versioning, I'm actively working on some approaches to how TCE will handle versioning - #510. Not much to see there at the moment as I'm still actively writing it up.

[skriss]

Hi @seemiller, just checking in to see if you were able to push this to Harbor?

[seemiller]

@skriss I've pushed this to Harbor. You can update the TODO with the following:
projects.registry.vmware.com/tce/contour@sha256:610344aef2d538d0333731a51823dc4d9b774aa430ac007288f589a6a6f7192a

I'll accept the PR after that. Thanks!

[skriss]

I've updated the TODO and squashed everything down to one commit.