Closed natalian98 closed 10 months ago
In order to test this PR:
charmcraft pack juju deploy ./oathkeeper*.charm --resource oci-image=$(yq eval '.resources.oci-image.upstream-source' metadata.yaml)
kubectl get cm -n <namespace> oathkeeper-config -o yaml
The access-rules configmap should be created, but without rules data.
access-rules
auth-proxy
juju deploy ./zinc-k8s*.charm --resource zinc-image=ghcr.io/jnsgruk/zinc:0.4.9 --trust juju relate oathkeeper zinc-k8s
kubectl get cm -n <namespace> access-rules -o yaml
Verify that the access rules repositories got updated in the config file:
repositories
juju ssh oathkeeper/0 "PYTHONPATH=agents/unit-oathkeeper-0/charm/venv/ python3 -c ' from ops import pebble p = pebble.Client(\"/charm/containers/oathkeeper/pebble.socket\") f = p.pull(\"/etc/config/oathkeeper/oathkeeper.yaml\") print(f.read()) '"
or run juju run oathkeeper/0 list-rules. You can also deploy traefik and relate it to zinc to verify that the access rules get updated.
juju run oathkeeper/0 list-rules
juju remove-relation oathkeeper zinc-k8s
In order to test this PR:
The
access-rules
configmap should be created, but without rules data.auth-proxy
(for example, zinc-k8s from this branch):access-rules
configmap:Verify that the access rules
repositories
got updated in the config file:or run
juju run oathkeeper/0 list-rules
. You can also deploy traefik and relate it to zinc to verify that the access rules get updated.juju remove-relation oathkeeper zinc-k8s
and check theaccess-rules
configmap to see that the rules got removed.