AppCred support #1430

Deydra71 · 2025-05-07T08:25:54Z

This PR add ApplicationCredential support enabling both global defaults and service-specific overrides in OpenStackControlPlane.

CRD updates:

New top-level spec.applicationCredential section with enabled, expirationDays and gracePeriodDays
Added applicationCredential field to each service section that has a corresponding Keystone user
Defaults guarantee visible enabled:false in every supported service, while expirationDays and gracePeriodDays are hidden unless specified directly (in that case global values are used).

Controller logic:

To enable AppCred both global and service specific must be enable: true
For each enabled service, controller creates AC CR
Deletes service AC CRs when either global or service enabled is turned off

Example:

 spec:
  applicationCredential:
    enabled: true
    expirationDays: 14
    gracePeriodDays: 7
  barbican:
    applicationCredential:
      enabled: true
      expirationDays: 2
      gracePeriodDays: 1
  cinder:
    applicationCredential:
      enabled: true

In the example barbican is using days overrides, while cinder is using default values.

Depends-On: openstack-k8s-operators/keystone-operator#567

openshift-ci · 2025-05-07T08:25:57Z

Skipping CI for Draft Pull Request.
If you want CI signal for your change, please convert it to an actual PR.
You can still manually trigger a test run with /test all

softwarefactory-project-zuul · 2025-05-07T08:26:03Z

Merge Failed.

This change or one of its cross-repo dependencies was unable to be automatically merged with the current state of its repository. Please rebase the change and upload a new patchset.
Warning:
Error merging github.com/openstack-k8s-operators/openstack-operator for 1430,edb1584a0e480eb9b099e45478bca2c880c67006

softwarefactory-project-zuul · 2025-05-07T08:30:36Z

Unable to freeze job graph: Job adoption-standalone-to-crc-ceph-provider depends on openstack-k8s-operators-content-provider which was not run.

danpawlik · 2025-05-07T08:50:25Z

recheck

softwarefactory-project-zuul · 2025-05-07T10:50:58Z

Build failed (check pipeline). Post recheck (without leading slash)
to rerun all jobs. Make sure the failure cause has been resolved before
you rerun jobs.

https://softwarefactory-project.io/zuul/t/rdoproject.org/buildset/fb95ce639e164bb190aa3b41fcda82da

✔️ openstack-k8s-operators-content-provider SUCCESS in 1h 59m 19s
❌ podified-multinode-edpm-deployment-crc FAILURE in 1h 38m 01s
✔️ cifmw-crc-podified-edpm-baremetal SUCCESS in 1h 31m 54s
❌ adoption-standalone-to-crc-ceph-provider FAILURE in 1h 39m 09s
✔️ openstack-operator-tempest-multinode SUCCESS in 1h 31m 34s
❌ openstack-operator-kuttl FAILURE in 28m 08s (non-voting)

softwarefactory-project-zuul · 2025-05-14T07:48:44Z

Build failed (check pipeline). Post recheck (without leading slash)
to rerun all jobs. Make sure the failure cause has been resolved before
you rerun jobs.

https://softwarefactory-project.io/zuul/t/rdoproject.org/buildset/64ab1660f5ff460cb0bdb2682d3b4149

❌ openstack-k8s-operators-content-provider FAILURE in 15m 15s
⚠️ podified-multinode-edpm-deployment-crc SKIPPED Skipped due to failed job openstack-k8s-operators-content-provider
⚠️ cifmw-crc-podified-edpm-baremetal SKIPPED Skipped due to failed job openstack-k8s-operators-content-provider
⚠️ adoption-standalone-to-crc-ceph-provider SKIPPED Skipped due to failed job openstack-k8s-operators-content-provider
⚠️ openstack-operator-tempest-multinode SKIPPED Skipped due to failed job openstack-k8s-operators-content-provider
⚠️ openstack-operator-kuttl SKIPPED Skipped due to failed job openstack-k8s-operators-content-provider (non-voting)

softwarefactory-project-zuul · 2025-05-14T08:29:01Z

Build failed (check pipeline). Post recheck (without leading slash)
to rerun all jobs. Make sure the failure cause has been resolved before
you rerun jobs.

https://softwarefactory-project.io/zuul/t/rdoproject.org/buildset/5ebbd01a8bc549b2956a87c3507363e2

❌ openstack-k8s-operators-content-provider FAILURE in 13m 33s
⚠️ podified-multinode-edpm-deployment-crc SKIPPED Skipped due to failed job openstack-k8s-operators-content-provider
⚠️ cifmw-crc-podified-edpm-baremetal SKIPPED Skipped due to failed job openstack-k8s-operators-content-provider
⚠️ adoption-standalone-to-crc-ceph-provider SKIPPED Skipped due to failed job openstack-k8s-operators-content-provider
⚠️ openstack-operator-tempest-multinode SKIPPED Skipped due to failed job openstack-k8s-operators-content-provider
⚠️ openstack-operator-kuttl SKIPPED Skipped due to failed job openstack-k8s-operators-content-provider (non-voting)

softwarefactory-project-zuul · 2025-05-16T09:35:17Z

Build failed (check pipeline). Post recheck (without leading slash)
to rerun all jobs. Make sure the failure cause has been resolved before
you rerun jobs.

https://softwarefactory-project.io/zuul/t/rdoproject.org/buildset/67ea6f17ebce4477b46d077171537d98

❌ openstack-k8s-operators-content-provider FAILURE in 13m 49s
⚠️ podified-multinode-edpm-deployment-crc SKIPPED Skipped due to failed job openstack-k8s-operators-content-provider
⚠️ cifmw-crc-podified-edpm-baremetal SKIPPED Skipped due to failed job openstack-k8s-operators-content-provider
⚠️ adoption-standalone-to-crc-ceph-provider SKIPPED Skipped due to failed job openstack-k8s-operators-content-provider
⚠️ openstack-operator-tempest-multinode SKIPPED Skipped due to failed job openstack-k8s-operators-content-provider
⚠️ openstack-operator-kuttl SKIPPED Skipped due to failed job openstack-k8s-operators-content-provider (non-voting)

softwarefactory-project-zuul · 2025-05-16T10:20:50Z

Build failed (check pipeline). Post recheck (without leading slash)
to rerun all jobs. Make sure the failure cause has been resolved before
you rerun jobs.

https://softwarefactory-project.io/zuul/t/rdoproject.org/buildset/65697c077ffe4630a698b4a94657a08a

❌ openstack-k8s-operators-content-provider FAILURE in 16m 43s
⚠️ podified-multinode-edpm-deployment-crc SKIPPED Skipped due to failed job openstack-k8s-operators-content-provider
⚠️ cifmw-crc-podified-edpm-baremetal SKIPPED Skipped due to failed job openstack-k8s-operators-content-provider
⚠️ adoption-standalone-to-crc-ceph-provider SKIPPED Skipped due to failed job openstack-k8s-operators-content-provider
⚠️ openstack-operator-tempest-multinode SKIPPED Skipped due to failed job openstack-k8s-operators-content-provider
⚠️ openstack-operator-kuttl SKIPPED Skipped due to failed job openstack-k8s-operators-content-provider (non-voting)

softwarefactory-project-zuul · 2025-05-16T13:07:52Z

Build failed (check pipeline). Post recheck (without leading slash)
to rerun all jobs. Make sure the failure cause has been resolved before
you rerun jobs.

https://softwarefactory-project.io/zuul/t/rdoproject.org/buildset/8b21d132d2c944f4bb8faccfff711e47

❌ openstack-k8s-operators-content-provider FAILURE in 14m 09s
⚠️ podified-multinode-edpm-deployment-crc SKIPPED Skipped due to failed job openstack-k8s-operators-content-provider
⚠️ cifmw-crc-podified-edpm-baremetal SKIPPED Skipped due to failed job openstack-k8s-operators-content-provider
⚠️ adoption-standalone-to-crc-ceph-provider SKIPPED Skipped due to failed job openstack-k8s-operators-content-provider
⚠️ openstack-operator-tempest-multinode SKIPPED Skipped due to failed job openstack-k8s-operators-content-provider
⚠️ openstack-operator-kuttl SKIPPED Skipped due to failed job openstack-k8s-operators-content-provider (non-voting)

softwarefactory-project-zuul · 2025-05-21T09:16:47Z

Merge Failed.

This change or one of its cross-repo dependencies was unable to be automatically merged with the current state of its repository. Please rebase the change and upload a new patchset.
Warning:
Error merging github.com/openstack-k8s-operators/openstack-operator for 1430,27db2bd11155d687612f5ae130e8cb42336647e1

softwarefactory-project-zuul · 2026-01-22T13:04:17Z

Merge Failed.

This change or one of its cross-repo dependencies was unable to be automatically merged with the current state of its repository. Please rebase the change and upload a new patchset.
Warning:
Error merging github.com/openstack-k8s-operators/openstack-operator for 1430,22dd45d7d0ac5a01b8420137d21943e09c259afe

softwarefactory-project-zuul · 2026-01-22T13:39:07Z

Build failed (check pipeline). Post recheck (without leading slash)
to rerun all jobs. Make sure the failure cause has been resolved before
you rerun jobs.

https://softwarefactory-project.io/zuul/t/rdoproject.org/buildset/f8ab8a85899342ce9ccc33f474348db3

❌ openstack-k8s-operators-content-provider FAILURE in 14m 12s
⚠️ podified-multinode-edpm-deployment-crc SKIPPED Skipped due to failed job openstack-k8s-operators-content-provider
⚠️ cifmw-crc-podified-edpm-baremetal SKIPPED Skipped due to failed job openstack-k8s-operators-content-provider
⚠️ adoption-standalone-to-crc-ceph-provider SKIPPED Skipped due to failed job openstack-k8s-operators-content-provider
⚠️ openstack-operator-tempest-multinode SKIPPED Skipped due to failed job openstack-k8s-operators-content-provider

stuggi · 2026-01-22T14:26:12Z

api/core/v1beta1/openstackcontrolplane_webhook.go

+			// Update the glanceAPI with Auth defaults
+			r.Spec.Glance.Template.GlanceAPIs[name] = glanceAPI


is this needed?

stuggi · 2026-01-22T14:27:20Z

api/core/v1beta1/openstackcontrolplane_webhook.go

+	// Initialize ApplicationCredential (watcher specific) field to avoid null value
+	// This ensures consistent behavior with other services.
+	if r.Spec.Watcher.ApplicationCredential == nil {
+		r.Spec.Watcher.ApplicationCredential = &ServiceAppCredSection{Enabled: false}
+	}
+


same, is this needed? seems to be the default from the kubebuilder annotation?

stuggi · 2026-01-22T14:28:41Z

config/operator/deployment/kustomization.yaml

+    name: openstack-operator-controller-operator
+    namespace: system
+- patch: '[{"op": "replace", "path": "/spec/template/spec/containers/0/env/0", "value":
+    {"name": "OPENSTACK_RELEASE_VERSION", "value": "0.5.0-1767944881"}}]'
+  target:
+    kind: Deployment
+    name: openstack-operator-controller-operator


I think we don't want to include the file config/operator/deployment/kustomization.yaml in the PR.

Yes, this is a generated remnant when I built the image, I will remove the changes here.

internal/openstack/applicationcredential.go

stuggi · 2026-01-22T14:44:23Z

internal/openstack/applicationcredential.go

+	switch serviceKey {
+	case "glance":
+		acSection = instance.Spec.Glance.ApplicationCredential
+	case "cinder":
+		acSection = instance.Spec.Cinder.ApplicationCredential
+	case "swift":
+		acSection = instance.Spec.Swift.ApplicationCredential
+	case "ironic":
+		acSection = instance.Spec.Ironic.ApplicationCredential
+	case "ironic-inspector":
+		// ironic-inspector shares the same AC configuration as ironic
+		acSection = instance.Spec.Ironic.ApplicationCredential
+	case "heat":
+		acSection = instance.Spec.Heat.ApplicationCredential
+	case "manila":
+		acSection = instance.Spec.Manila.ApplicationCredential
+	case "neutron":
+		acSection = instance.Spec.Neutron.ApplicationCredential
+	case "nova":
+		acSection = instance.Spec.Nova.ApplicationCredential
+	case "placement":
+		acSection = instance.Spec.Placement.ApplicationCredential
+	case "octavia":
+		acSection = instance.Spec.Octavia.ApplicationCredential
+	case "barbican":
+		acSection = instance.Spec.Barbican.ApplicationCredential
+	case "designate":
+		acSection = instance.Spec.Designate.ApplicationCredential
+	case "watcher":
+		acSection = instance.Spec.Watcher.ApplicationCredential
+	case "ceilometer":
+		acSection = instance.Spec.Telemetry.ApplicationCredentialCeilometer
+	case "aodh":
+		acSection = instance.Spec.Telemetry.ApplicationCredentialAodh
+	case "cloudkitty":
+		acSection = instance.Spec.Telemetry.ApplicationCredentialCloudKitty
+	}


I think we should not have service specific things in here. it should be just a generic func. if the services passes in its ApplicationCredential I think we can get rid of all these?

yes, definitely

stuggi · 2026-01-22T15:14:27Z

internal/openstack/applicationcredential.go

+	acExists := err == nil
+
+	// Check if AC is enabled for this service
+	if !shouldEnableACForService(serviceKey, instance) {


as mentioned bellow, if we pass in the ApplicationCredential I don't think we need that complex shouldEnableACForService with different service names.
could be just return ac != nil && ac.Enabled, right?

stuggi · 2026-01-22T15:15:38Z

internal/openstack/applicationcredential.go

+
+// servicesWithMultipleUsers defines services that have multiple Keystone users
+// The function returns nil if the service is not enabled or template is not initialized
+var servicesWithMultipleUsers = map[string]func(*corev1beta1.OpenStackControlPlane) []ServiceUserConfig{


is this still needed?

stuggi · 2026-01-22T15:20:12Z

internal/openstack/barbican.go


+	// Application Credential Management (Day-2 operation)
+	barbicanReady := barbican.Status.ObservedGeneration == barbican.Generation && barbican.IsReady()
+	acEnabled := shouldEnableACForService("barbican", instance)


if we already check it here, which is basically Template.Auth.ApplicationCredentialSecret != nil && Template.Auth.ApplicationCredentialSecret.Enabled lets pass it to EnsureApplicationCredentialForService. add a simple func where each service can pass in its Auth and get back the bool.

stuggi · 2026-01-22T15:22:03Z

internal/openstack/barbican.go

+	if !acEnabled {
+		instance.Spec.Barbican.Template.Auth.ApplicationCredentialSecret = ""
+	} else if acReady {
+		instance.Spec.Barbican.Template.Auth.ApplicationCredentialSecret = keystonev1.GetACSecretName("barbican")


I think EnsureApplicationCredentialForService should return the AC and we then can just use the secret from the AC.

stuggi · 2026-01-22T15:23:05Z

internal/openstack/barbican.go

+		ctx,
+		helper,
+		instance,
+		"barbican",


should or could this be barbican.Name, could remove the need for another static string.

softwarefactory-project-zuul · 2026-01-23T07:27:09Z

Build failed (check pipeline). Post recheck (without leading slash)
to rerun all jobs. Make sure the failure cause has been resolved before
you rerun jobs.

https://softwarefactory-project.io/zuul/t/rdoproject.org/buildset/5c42e7939c0a40fa92ed0b1ba8dfae74

❌ openstack-k8s-operators-content-provider FAILURE in 12m 38s
⚠️ podified-multinode-edpm-deployment-crc SKIPPED Skipped due to failed job openstack-k8s-operators-content-provider
⚠️ cifmw-crc-podified-edpm-baremetal SKIPPED Skipped due to failed job openstack-k8s-operators-content-provider
⚠️ adoption-standalone-to-crc-ceph-provider SKIPPED Skipped due to failed job openstack-k8s-operators-content-provider
⚠️ openstack-operator-tempest-multinode SKIPPED Skipped due to failed job openstack-k8s-operators-content-provider

stuggi · 2026-01-23T09:02:59Z

internal/openstack/barbican.go

+	if barbicanSecret == "" {
+		barbicanSecret = instance.Spec.Secret
+	}
+


I think to prevent the bellow mentioned flapping we'd have to do something like we do for certs to fetch the current auth from the running barbican

if isACEnabled(instance.Spec.ApplicationCredential, instance.Spec.Barbican.ApplicationCredential) { instance.Spec.Barbican.Template.Auth = barbican.Spec.Barbican.Template.Auth }

stuggi · 2026-01-23T09:05:09Z

internal/openstack/barbican.go

+	// Set or clear ApplicationCredentialSecret
+	// - If AC disabled: use password
+	// - If AC enabled AND ready: use AC
+	// - If AC enabled BUT not ready: leave unchanged to avoid flapping
+	if acSecretName == "" && !isACEnabled(instance.Spec.ApplicationCredential, instance.Spec.Barbican.ApplicationCredential) {
+		instance.Spec.Barbican.Template.Auth.ApplicationCredentialSecret = ""
+	} else if acSecretName != "" {
+		instance.Spec.Barbican.Template.Auth.ApplicationCredentialSecret = acSecretName
+	}


with the above comment, it might be ok to just assign what EnsureApplicationCredentialForService returns as the ApplicationCredentialSecret

instance.Spec.Barbican.Template.Auth.ApplicationCredentialSecret = acSecretName

If AC disabled: use password, it returns ""

If AC enabled AND ready. it returns the name

stuggi · 2026-01-23T09:08:08Z

internal/openstack/barbican.go

+	)
+	if err != nil {
+		return ctrl.Result{}, err
+	}


do we have to return for the Application Credential not ready yet case when we return with the RequeueAfter?

if (acResult != ctrl.Result{}) { return acResult, nil }

stuggi · 2026-01-23T09:16:34Z

internal/openstack/barbican.go

+		barbicanSecret = instance.Spec.Secret
+	}
+
+	acSecretName, acResult, err := EnsureApplicationCredentialForService(


the default for AC is that they are disabled. wondering if we don't have to call it if ac is disabled and there is no current barbican.Spec.Barbican.Template.Auth.ApplicationCredentialSecret configured?

stuggi · 2026-01-23T09:19:15Z

internal/openstack/barbican.go

+	if barbicanReady && (acResult != ctrl.Result{}) {
+		return acResult, nil
+	}


as commented above, wondering why we do it at the bottom and not right after the ensure func?

I thought that if we returned early right after the rnsure, the service would never get created/udpated when AC is being providioned because we would skip CreateOrPatch?

stuggi · 2026-01-23T09:20:09Z

this looks a lot cleaner!! just some questions for clarification, and maybe improving things

softwarefactory-project-zuul · 2026-01-23T11:30:15Z

Build failed (check pipeline). Post recheck (without leading slash)
to rerun all jobs. Make sure the failure cause has been resolved before
you rerun jobs.

https://softwarefactory-project.io/zuul/t/rdoproject.org/buildset/137c17c222454d38876bdbcd8e0a819a

❌ openstack-k8s-operators-content-provider FAILURE in 12m 25s
⚠️ podified-multinode-edpm-deployment-crc SKIPPED Skipped due to failed job openstack-k8s-operators-content-provider
⚠️ cifmw-crc-podified-edpm-baremetal SKIPPED Skipped due to failed job openstack-k8s-operators-content-provider
⚠️ adoption-standalone-to-crc-ceph-provider SKIPPED Skipped due to failed job openstack-k8s-operators-content-provider
⚠️ openstack-operator-tempest-multinode SKIPPED Skipped due to failed job openstack-k8s-operators-content-provider

softwarefactory-project-zuul · 2026-01-23T13:48:32Z

Merge Failed.

This change or one of its cross-repo dependencies was unable to be automatically merged with the current state of its repository. Please rebase the change and upload a new patchset.
Warning:
Error merging github.com/openstack-k8s-operators/openstack-operator for 1430,abd35b4d11d6b95e7553f8b0d421da5d6afbf10d

openshift-ci · 2026-01-27T14:46:50Z

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: Deydra71
Once this PR has been reviewed and has the lgtm label, please assign rabi for approval. For more information see the Code Review Process.

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

Details

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

OWNERS

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

softwarefactory-project-zuul · 2026-01-27T15:03:13Z

Build failed (check pipeline). Post recheck (without leading slash)
to rerun all jobs. Make sure the failure cause has been resolved before
you rerun jobs.

https://softwarefactory-project.io/zuul/t/rdoproject.org/buildset/045a5dddacfa477d9cb68393191d1719

❌ openstack-k8s-operators-content-provider FAILURE in 12m 52s
⚠️ podified-multinode-edpm-deployment-crc SKIPPED Skipped due to failed job openstack-k8s-operators-content-provider
⚠️ cifmw-crc-podified-edpm-baremetal SKIPPED Skipped due to failed job openstack-k8s-operators-content-provider
⚠️ adoption-standalone-to-crc-ceph-provider SKIPPED Skipped due to failed job openstack-k8s-operators-content-provider
⚠️ openstack-operator-tempest-multinode SKIPPED Skipped due to failed job openstack-k8s-operators-content-provider

xek · 2026-01-27T15:42:01Z

api/go.mod

 replace github.com/cert-manager/cmctl/v2 => github.com/cert-manager/cmctl/v2 v2.1.2-0.20241127223932-88edb96860cf //allow-merging
+
+// appcred related changes
+replace github.com/openstack-k8s-operators/keystone-operator/api => github.com/Deydra71/keystone-operator/api v0.0.0-20260119142142-e3bd4fb9750f //allow-merging


Remove these lines after new versions are released and run tidy

softwarefactory-project-zuul · 2026-01-27T16:17:05Z

Build failed (check pipeline). Post recheck (without leading slash)
to rerun all jobs. Make sure the failure cause has been resolved before
you rerun jobs.

https://softwarefactory-project.io/zuul/t/rdoproject.org/buildset/b1b7e13ddaa04b02a720ca60197ce146

❌ openstack-k8s-operators-content-provider FAILURE in 12m 34s
⚠️ podified-multinode-edpm-deployment-crc SKIPPED Skipped due to failed job openstack-k8s-operators-content-provider
⚠️ cifmw-crc-podified-edpm-baremetal SKIPPED Skipped due to failed job openstack-k8s-operators-content-provider
⚠️ adoption-standalone-to-crc-ceph-provider SKIPPED Skipped due to failed job openstack-k8s-operators-content-provider
⚠️ openstack-operator-tempest-multinode SKIPPED Skipped due to failed job openstack-k8s-operators-content-provider

Signed-off-by: Veronika Fisarova <vfisarov@redhat.com>

softwarefactory-project-zuul · 2026-01-28T12:08:40Z

Build failed (check pipeline). Post recheck (without leading slash)
to rerun all jobs. Make sure the failure cause has been resolved before
you rerun jobs.

https://softwarefactory-project.io/zuul/t/rdoproject.org/buildset/743bfa4caa564529bf798ba240bf1954

❌ openstack-k8s-operators-content-provider FAILURE in 27m 28s
⚠️ podified-multinode-edpm-deployment-crc SKIPPED Skipped due to failed job openstack-k8s-operators-content-provider
⚠️ cifmw-crc-podified-edpm-baremetal SKIPPED Skipped due to failed job openstack-k8s-operators-content-provider
⚠️ adoption-standalone-to-crc-ceph-provider SKIPPED Skipped due to failed job openstack-k8s-operators-content-provider
⚠️ openstack-operator-tempest-multinode SKIPPED Skipped due to failed job openstack-k8s-operators-content-provider

openshift-ci · 2026-01-28T12:46:21Z

@Deydra71: The following tests failed, say /retest to rerun all failed tests or /retest-required to rerun all mandatory failed tests:

Test name	Commit	Details	Required	Rerun command
ci/prow/precommit-check	`9ecd49b`	link	true	`/test precommit-check`
ci/prow/openstack-operator-build-deploy-kuttl-4-18	`9ecd49b`	link	true	`/test openstack-operator-build-deploy-kuttl-4-18`
ci/prow/openstack-operator-build-deploy-kuttl	`9ecd49b`	link	true	`/test openstack-operator-build-deploy-kuttl`

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard.

Details

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository. I understand the commands that are listed here.

Deydra71 · 2026-02-02T17:19:35Z

Note: we need to update cinder, manila and heat after they are bumped, because we changed the placement of Auth spec in these service operators

openshift-merge-robot · 2026-02-02T17:19:45Z

PR needs rebase.

Details

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository.

Deydra71 requested review from mauricioharley, stuggi and vakwetu May 7, 2025 08:25

Deydra71 added the do-not-merge/work-in-progress label May 7, 2025

openshift-merge-robot added the needs-rebase label May 7, 2025

Deydra71 force-pushed the appcred-support branch from edb1584 to abb32f9 Compare May 7, 2025 08:30

openshift-merge-robot removed the needs-rebase label May 7, 2025

openshift-merge-robot added the needs-rebase label May 13, 2025

Deydra71 force-pushed the appcred-support branch from abb32f9 to 7cda4e4 Compare May 14, 2025 07:25

openshift-merge-robot removed the needs-rebase label May 14, 2025

Deydra71 force-pushed the appcred-support branch from 7cda4e4 to 6472083 Compare May 14, 2025 07:32

Deydra71 force-pushed the appcred-support branch from 6472083 to 6ed1e4b Compare May 14, 2025 08:14

Deydra71 force-pushed the appcred-support branch from 535e8ef to 0ddd273 Compare May 16, 2025 10:02

Deydra71 force-pushed the appcred-support branch from 0ddd273 to f5a74e2 Compare May 16, 2025 12:52

Deydra71 force-pushed the appcred-support branch 2 times, most recently from 62fd3e5 to 27db2bd Compare May 21, 2025 09:16

openshift-merge-robot added the needs-rebase label May 21, 2025

Deydra71 force-pushed the appcred-support branch from 27db2bd to 9014923 Compare May 21, 2025 09:41

openshift-merge-robot removed the needs-rebase label May 21, 2025

Deydra71 force-pushed the appcred-support branch from 22dd45d to fc817bc Compare January 22, 2026 13:22

openshift-merge-robot removed the needs-rebase label Jan 22, 2026

stuggi reviewed Jan 22, 2026

View reviewed changes

Deydra71 force-pushed the appcred-support branch from fc817bc to bf826ed Compare January 23, 2026 07:13

stuggi reviewed Jan 23, 2026

View reviewed changes

Deydra71 force-pushed the appcred-support branch 2 times, most recently from 1378a63 to b14002d Compare January 23, 2026 11:16

Deydra71 force-pushed the appcred-support branch from b14002d to abd35b4 Compare January 23, 2026 13:48

openshift-merge-robot added the needs-rebase label Jan 23, 2026

xek force-pushed the appcred-support branch from abd35b4 to 8c3039b Compare January 27, 2026 14:46

openshift-merge-robot removed the needs-rebase label Jan 27, 2026

xek force-pushed the appcred-support branch from 8c3039b to b82b652 Compare January 27, 2026 14:49

xek force-pushed the appcred-support branch from b82b652 to 1f136f8 Compare January 27, 2026 15:39

xek reviewed Jan 27, 2026

View reviewed changes

AppCred support

9ecd49b

Signed-off-by: Veronika Fisarova <vfisarov@redhat.com>

xek force-pushed the appcred-support branch from 1f136f8 to 9ecd49b Compare January 28, 2026 11:36

openshift-merge-robot added the needs-rebase label Feb 2, 2026

		// Update the glanceAPI with Auth defaults
		r.Spec.Glance.Template.GlanceAPIs[name] = glanceAPI

AppCred support #1430

Are you sure you want to change the base?

AppCred support #1430

Uh oh!

Conversation

Deydra71 commented May 7, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

openshift-ci bot commented May 7, 2025

Uh oh!

softwarefactory-project-zuul bot commented May 7, 2025

Uh oh!

softwarefactory-project-zuul bot commented May 7, 2025

Uh oh!

danpawlik commented May 7, 2025

Uh oh!

softwarefactory-project-zuul bot commented May 7, 2025

Uh oh!

softwarefactory-project-zuul bot commented May 14, 2025

Uh oh!

softwarefactory-project-zuul bot commented May 14, 2025

Uh oh!

softwarefactory-project-zuul bot commented May 16, 2025

Uh oh!

softwarefactory-project-zuul bot commented May 16, 2025

Uh oh!

softwarefactory-project-zuul bot commented May 16, 2025

Uh oh!

softwarefactory-project-zuul bot commented May 21, 2025

Uh oh!

softwarefactory-project-zuul bot commented Jan 22, 2026

Uh oh!

softwarefactory-project-zuul bot commented Jan 22, 2026

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

softwarefactory-project-zuul bot commented Jan 23, 2026

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

stuggi commented Jan 23, 2026

Uh oh!

softwarefactory-project-zuul bot commented Jan 23, 2026

Uh oh!

softwarefactory-project-zuul bot commented Jan 23, 2026

Uh oh!

openshift-ci bot commented Jan 27, 2026

Uh oh!

softwarefactory-project-zuul bot commented Jan 27, 2026

Deydra71 commented May 7, 2025 •

edited

Loading

xek Jan 27, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Deydra71 commented Feb 2, 2026 •

edited

Loading