TektonConfig Fails To Reconcile if Pruner Settings Are Missing

[adambkaplan]

Expected Behavior

If a TektonConfig object is created without the .spec.pruner.keep or .spec.pruner.keep-since setting, the operator applies a default setting to one of these values.

Actual Behavior

If the .spec.pruner.keep and .spec.pruner.keep-since settings are missing, the operator fails to reconcile because any update request is blocked by the validating webhook

Steps to Reproduce the Problem

Observed when deploying the Shipwright Operator with OLM, which uses API dependency resolution to deploy the Tekton Operator.

Additional Info

• Kubernetes version:

  Output of kubectl version:

Version 1.30.z

- Tekton Pipeline version: 0.62.x

**Output of `tkn version` or `kubectl get pods -n tekton-pipelines -l app=tekton-pipelines-controller -o=jsonpath='{.items[0].metadata.labels.version}'`**


<!-- Any other additional information -->

Log from Tekton Operator:

{"level":"info","timestamp":"2024-11-25T18:36:53.401Z","logger":"tekton-operator-lifecycle.event-broadcaster","caller":"record/event.go:364","msg":"Event(v1.ObjectReference{Kind:"TektonConfig", Namespace:"", Name:"config", UID:"de70e9b6-ec63-4b25-b377-add833640a29", APIVersion:"operator.tekton.dev/v1alpha1", ResourceVersion:"17433", FieldPath:""}): type: 'Warning' reason: 'UpdateFailed' Failed to update status for "config": admission webhook "validation.webhook.operator.tekton.dev" denied the request: validation failed: expected exactly one, got neither: spec.pruner.keep, spec.pruner.keep-since\nmissing field(s): spec.pruner.resources","commit":"391a4f0","knative.dev/pod":"openshift-pipelines-operator-648cb677d9-vv4fc"}

Red Hat issue tracker: https://issues.redhat.com/browse/SRVKP-6832

Related Shipwright operator bug: https://github.com/shipwright-io/operator/issues/231

[jkhelil]

@adambkaplan defaulting one of these values is already there https://github.com/tektoncd/operator/blob/v0.73.0/pkg/apis/operator/v1alpha1/tektonconfig_defaults.go#L79
Can this be a race between shipwright operator trying to create tektonconfig without spec.pruner.keep and tekton operator trying to default it ?
There is also an alternative to have a default tektonconfig created by tekton operator via AUTOINSTALL_COMPONENTS
https://github.com/tektoncd/operator/blob/v0.73.0/operatorhub/openshift/release-artifacts/bundle/manifests/tekton-config-defaults_v1_configmap.yaml#L3

[adambkaplan]

Can this be a race between shipwright operator trying to create tektonconfig without spec.pruner.keep and tekton operator trying to default it ?

I can't rule that out for certain. In any case we added a pruner default setting on the Shipwright operator side, and plan to release it soon: shipwright-io/operator#233