Gerrit-K commented on code in PR #602:
URL: https://github.com/apache/polaris/pull/602#discussion_r1901829875
##########
helm/polaris/templates/deployment.yaml:
##########
@@ -56,6 +56,10 @@ spec:
imagePullPolicy: {{ tpl .Values.toolsImage.pullPolicy . }}
command: ["jar"]
args: ["-cf", "/eclipselink-config/conf.jar", "-C", "/secret",
"persistence.xml"]
+ {{- if .Values.securityContext}}
+ securityContext:
Review Comment:
> Shouldn't we use a different security context?
Probably yes. I think it might make sense to postpone this until the values
are refactored as discussed
[here](https://github.com/apache/polaris/pull/601#discussion_r1900905485).
Otherwise, I'd be afraid that I would have to add a lot of new values (partly
because the bootstrap job apparently already uses the security context values
from the deployment):
```yaml
podSecurityContext: {}
securityContext: {}
initContainerSecurityContext: {}
bootstrapPodSecurityContext: {}
bootstrapSecurityContext: {}
bootstrapInitContainerSecurityContext: {}
```
If that's okay, I would just add the missing unittests and keep the
refactoring for a later MR. WDYT?
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]
