Skip to content

🌱 Use dedicated Secret type for externalized object Secrets#2613

Merged
openshift-merge-bot[bot] merged 1 commit intooperator-framework:mainfrom
pedjak:custom-secret-type
Mar 31, 2026
Merged

🌱 Use dedicated Secret type for externalized object Secrets#2613
openshift-merge-bot[bot] merged 1 commit intooperator-framework:mainfrom
pedjak:custom-secret-type

Conversation

@pedjak
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@pedjak pedjak commented Mar 31, 2026 •
edited
Loading

Description

Set custom Secret type olm.operatorframework.io/object-data on Secrets that store externalized COS object content. This distinguishes OLM-managed Secrets from user-created ones and enables easy identification and filtering.

Reviewer Checklist

  • API Go Documentation
  • Tests: Unit Tests (and E2E Tests, if appropriate)
  • Comprehensive Commit Messages
  • Links to related GitHub Issue(s)

Copilot AI review requested due to automatic review settings March 31, 2026 09:03
@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot requested a review from fgiudici March 31, 2026 09:03
@netlify
Copy link
Copy Markdown

netlify bot commented Mar 31, 2026 •
edited
Loading

✅ Deploy Preview for olmv1 ready!

Name Link
🔨 Latest commit 53d7be9
🔍 Latest deploy log https://app.netlify.com/projects/olmv1/deploys/69cc128a5e1e4e0008b1c2fb
😎 Deploy Preview https://deploy-preview-2613--olmv1.netlify.app
📱 Preview on mobile
Toggle QR Code...

QR Code

Use your smartphone camera to open QR code link.

To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify project configuration.

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot requested a review from grokspawn March 31, 2026 09:03
Copilot AI reviewed Mar 31, 2026
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Pull request overview

This PR introduces a dedicated Secret type (olm.operatorframework.io/phase-data) for Secrets that store externalized object content referenced by ClusterObjectSet ref entries. This distinguishes OLM-managed ref Secrets from user-created Secrets and enables easy identification of system-managed resources.

Changes:

  • Add custom SecretTypeRefData constant in the labels package with value olm.operatorframework.io/phase-data
  • Update SecretPacker to set this type when creating ref Secrets
  • Add unit test assertion verifying the Secret type is set correctly
  • Add E2E test step and scenario validating ref Secrets have the correct type
  • Update design documentation with the new Secret type convention and examples

Reviewed changes

Copilot reviewed 6 out of 6 changed files in this pull request and generated no comments.

Show a summary per file
File Description
internal/operator-controller/labels/labels.go Defines new SecretTypeRefData constant for the custom Secret type
internal/operator-controller/applier/secretpacker.go Sets the custom type when creating ref Secrets
internal/operator-controller/applier/secretpacker_test.go Verifies the Secret type is set correctly in unit tests
test/e2e/steps/steps.go Adds new E2E test step to verify ref Secrets have the correct type
test/e2e/features/install.feature Adds E2E test scenario validating the Secret type
docs/concepts/large-bundle-support.md Updates design documentation with Secret type conventions and examples

💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.

@codecov
Copy link
Copy Markdown

codecov bot commented Mar 31, 2026 •
edited
Loading

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 68.81%. Comparing base (435e9c5) to head (53d7be9).
⚠️ Report is 2 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files 
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #2613      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   68.86%   68.81%   -0.05%     
==========================================
  Files         139      139              
  Lines        9872     9931      +59     
==========================================
+ Hits         6798     6834      +36     
- Misses       2557     2580      +23     
  Partials      517      517
Flag Coverage Δ
e2e 37.50% <0.00%> (+0.03%) ⬆️
experimental-e2e 52.38% <100.00%> (-0.20%) ⬇️
unit 53.53% <100.00%> (+0.02%) ⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

@fgiudici
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

fgiudici commented Mar 31, 2026

I'm still not very familiar with the code base, but as soon as we put the missing emoji in the PR heading, this PR looks good to me!

As a side note, now that we have the olm.operatorframework.io/phase-data for the secrets, wondering if there could be a more intuitive label than olm.operatorframework.io/revision-phase-data for the chained secrets type.

@fgiudici fgiudici changed the title Add custom Secret type for ref Secrets ✨ Add custom Secret type for ref Secrets Mar 31, 2026
@fgiudici
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

fgiudici commented Mar 31, 2026

/lgtm

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Mar 31, 2026
joelanford
joelanford reviewed Mar 31, 2026
View reviewed changes
docs/concepts/large-bundle-support.md
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@joelanford joelanford Mar 31, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I would suggest moving this file elsewhere. The concepts docs are user-facing docs that describe functions/behaviors that users need to be aware of and directly interact with.

The typical doc flow is to put everything in drafts and then do a separate "promotion" out of drafts.

We probably also now need a specific process for design doc organization.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@perdasilva perdasilva Mar 31, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

yeah - let's do that. Or maybe even drop the docs from this PR. I've just put up a doc PR. Maybe we could iterate there?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@pedjak pedjak Mar 31, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I would suggest moving this file elsewhere. The concepts docs are user-facing docs that describe functions/behaviors that users need to be aware of and directly interact with.

Sure, but let's do that in a separate - follow up PR.

@pedjak pedjak changed the title ✨ Add custom Secret type for ref Secrets 🌱 Add custom Secret type for ref Secrets Mar 31, 2026
@pedjak @claude
Use dedicated Secret type for externalized object Secrets
53d7be9 
Set custom Secret type `olm.operatorframework.io/object-data` on
Secrets that store externalized COS object content. This distinguishes
OLM-managed Secrets from user-created ones and enables easy
identification and filtering.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>
@pedjak pedjak changed the title 🌱 Add custom Secret type for ref Secrets Use dedicated Secret type for externalized object Secrets Mar 31, 2026
@pedjak pedjak force-pushed the custom-secret-type branch from 860fc63 to 53d7be9 Compare March 31, 2026 18:29
@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot removed the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Mar 31, 2026
@pedjak pedjak changed the title Use dedicated Secret type for externalized object Secrets 🌱 Use dedicated Secret type for externalized object Secrets Mar 31, 2026
@pedjak pedjak requested a review from joelanford March 31, 2026 18:33
@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. labels Mar 31, 2026
@joelanford
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

joelanford commented Mar 31, 2026

/approve

@fgiudici
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

fgiudici commented Mar 31, 2026

/lgtm

rashmigottipati
rashmigottipati approved these changes Mar 31, 2026
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@rashmigottipati rashmigottipati left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

/lgtm

@openshift-ci
Copy link
Copy Markdown

openshift-ci bot commented Mar 31, 2026

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: joelanford, rashmigottipati

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

The pull request process is described here

Details Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

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

@openshift-merge-bot openshift-merge-bot bot merged commit 1586800 into operator-framework:main Mar 31, 2026
39 of 42 checks passed
@pedjak pedjak mentioned this pull request Apr 1, 2026
Merged
4 tasks
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@perdasilva perdasilva perdasilva left review comments

Copilot code review Copilot Copilot left review comments

@joelanford joelanford joelanford approved these changes

@rashmigottipati rashmigottipati rashmigottipati approved these changes

@fgiudici fgiudici Awaiting requested review from fgiudici

@grokspawn grokspawn Awaiting requested review from grokspawn

Assignees

@joelanford joelanford

@rashmigottipati rashmigottipati

@fgiudici fgiudici

Labels

approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged.

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants

@pedjak @fgiudici @joelanford @perdasilva @rashmigottipati