🐛 fix: (helm/v1alpha1): remove redundant condition in if clause

[monteiro-renato]

No description provided.

[k8s-ci-robot]

Hi @monteiro-renato. Thanks for your PR.

I'm waiting for a kubernetes-sigs member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with /ok-to-test on its own line. Until that is done, I will not automatically test new commits in this PR, but the usual testing commands by org members will still work. Regular contributors should join the org to skip this step.

Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the ok-to-test label.

I understand the commands that are listed here.

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.

[mateusoliveira43]

does this change behavior?

prior Certificate/serving-cert object was only created if both .Values.certmanager.enable and .Values.webhook.enable were true?

now Certificate/serving-cert object is created if .Values.webhook.enable is true?

[camilamacedo86]

certs for webhooks must be created if webhook and certmanager are enabled
certs for metrics must be created if metrics and certmanager are enabled

[monteiro-renato]

It does but wasn't intentional. I guess I messed it up when I forced push.
The "problematic" line is this one

kubebuilder/testdata/project-v4-with-plugins/dist/chart/templates/certmanager/certificate.yaml

Line 36 in ad4afdb

{{- if and .Values.metrics.enable .Values.certmanager.enable }}

The if with ".Values.certmanager.enable" is redundant as the value is already true on line 1.

I can either remove that extra condition on the if clause or have 3 different if statements.

[camilamacedo86]

So we have no problem at all?
If we have I am ok with both
Because we need asap before the release change the webhook implementation
see if we can only provide webhooks and enable true instead of adding the values there.

Otherwise, we might need to just comment on the changes and say that webhook is not supported yet.
it might a better approach than provide something that we need to change soon

[camilamacedo86]

/ok-to-test

[k8s-ci-robot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: camilamacedo86, monteiro-renato

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

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• OWNERS [camilamacedo86]

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

[camilamacedo86]

/lgtm