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

Add optional annotations for configmaps in Fluentd chart #357

Open
Boojapho opened this issue May 22, 2023 · 3 comments · May be fixed by #359
Open

Add optional annotations for configmaps in Fluentd chart #357

Boojapho opened this issue May 22, 2023 · 3 comments · May be fixed by #359

Comments

@Boojapho
Copy link
Contributor

Boojapho commented May 22, 2023

The Helm chart does not support adding annotations to the configmaps created. Add the option to put annotations on the configmaps.

In my use case, I'm scanning the Kubernetes manifests using Checkov and need to add annotations to skip specific checks. I'm sure there are other use cases.

@Boojapho
Copy link
Contributor Author

@stevehipwell You mentioned in the PR that applying the annotations across all configmaps may not be what we want. The dashboard CM is separate from the other CMs. I'd be open to implementing it different. But, in my use case I just need to add a specific skip flag for a test suite to ignore a rule on CMs. Let me know if you have an alternative. We can always update it in the future if needed.

@Boojapho Boojapho changed the title Add optional annotations for configmaps in Helm charts Add optional annotations for configmaps in Fluentd chart May 23, 2023
@Boojapho
Copy link
Contributor Author

I narrowed the scope as I only need the fluentd chart updated. I split the annotations into one for dashboards (similar to the fluent-bit chart) and one for configs (to cover fileConfigs and configMapConfigs).

@stevehipwell
Copy link
Collaborator

That seems like a good compromise.

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 a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants