I think I'm missing some background here, but what use case is this for? This seems like it would only come up in operators which can do stuff to any specified object type based on runtime inputs? That seems legit but want to clarify since we've gotten questions about this kind of feature before when "two normal controllers that both have an early return check" was the far simpler solution :)

/assign @DirectXMan12

@kevindelgado: The following tests failed, say /retest to rerun all failed tests:

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard. Please help us cut down on flakes by linking to an open issue when you hit one in your PR.

<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/test-infra repository. I understand the commands that are listed here. </details> <!-- test report -->

Dusting the cobwebs off this with a new WIP implementation at https://github.com/kubernetes-sigs/controller-runtime/pull/1527

@kevindelgado: The following test failed, say /retest to rerun all failed tests:

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard. Please help us cut down on flakes by linking to an open issue when you hit one in your PR.

<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/test-infra repository. I understand the commands that are listed here. </details> <!-- test report -->

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: <a href="https://github.com/kubernetes-sigs/controller-runtime/pull/1527#" title="Author self-approved">kevindelgado</a> To complete the pull request process, please assign directxman12 after the PR has been reviewed. You can assign the PR to them by writing /assign @directxman12 in a comment when ready.

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

<details open> 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 </details> <!-- META={"approvers":["directxman12"]} -->

<!-- please add an icon to the title of this PR (see VERSIONING.md), and delete this line and similar ones --> <!-- the icon will be either ⚠ (:warning:, major), ✨ (:sparkles, minor), 🐛 (:bug:, patch), 📖 (:book:, docs), or 🌱 (:seedling:, other) -->

<!-- What does this do, and why do we need it? --> This is an updated implementation of the design to add conditional controller support from https://github.com/kubernetes-sigs/controller-runtime/pull/1192

It offers a way to configure controllers to seamlessly start/stop/restart themselves based on whether the CRD it watches exists on the cluster or not. It does so by:

1. Implementing a stop channel on the informers map MapEntry that can be retrieved from the cache's Informers interface that fires when the informer has stopped.
2. A new Source is created called ConditionalSource that is implemented by a ConditionalKind that has a Ready() method that blocks until the kind's type is installed on the cluster and ready to be controlled, and a StartNotifyDone() that starts the underlying source with a channel that fires when the source (and its underlying informer have stopped).
3. Controllers maintain a list of ConditonalSources known as conditionalWatches that can be added like regular watches via the controllers Watch method. For any ConditionalSource that Watch() is called with, it uses Ready() to determine when to StartNotifyDone() it and uses the done channel returned by StartNotifyDone() to determine when the watch has started and that it should wait on Ready() again.
4. The manager recognize a special type or Runnable known as a ConditionalRunnable that has a Ready() method to indicate when the underlying Runnable can be ran.
5. The controller builder enables users supply a boolean conditional option to the builder's For, Owns, and Watches inputs that creates ConditionalRunnables to be ran by the manager.

Currently it has been manually tested and there is a single integration test that checks the whole CRD install/uninstall/reinstall flow. I intend to add more unit tests for each individual component that has changed, but wanted to get feedback on the overall design first.

@kevindelgado: The following test failed, say /retest to rerun all failed tests:

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard. Please help us cut down on flakes by linking to an open issue when you hit one in your PR.

<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/test-infra repository. I understand the commands that are listed here. </details> <!-- test report -->

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: <a href="https://github.com/kubernetes-sigs/controller-runtime/pull/1192#" title="Author self-approved">kevindelgado</a> To complete the pull request process, please ask for approval from alvaroaleman after the PR has been reviewed.

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

<details open> 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 </details> <!-- META={"approvers":["alvaroaleman"]} -->

@shysank: The following test failed, say /retest to rerun all failed tests:

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard. Please help us cut down on flakes by linking to an open issue when you hit one in your PR.

<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/test-infra repository. I understand the commands that are listed here. </details> <!-- test report -->

@vincepri: The following test failed, say /retest to rerun all failed tests:

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard. Please help us cut down on flakes by linking to an open issue when you hit one in your PR.

<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/test-infra repository. I understand the commands that are listed here. </details> <!-- test report -->

/retest

@vincepri: The following test failed, say /retest to rerun all failed tests:

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard. Please help us cut down on flakes by linking to an open issue when you hit one in your PR.

<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/test-infra repository. I understand the commands that are listed here. </details> <!-- test report -->

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: <a href="https://github.com/kubernetes-sigs/controller-runtime/pull/1526#" title="Author self-approved">vincepri</a>

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

The pull request process is described here

<details > Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• OWNERS [vincepri]

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment </details> <!-- META={"approvers":[]} -->

Signed-off-by: Vince Prignano [email protected]

<!-- please add an icon to the title of this PR (see VERSIONING.md), and delete this line and similar ones --> <!-- the icon will be either ⚠ (:warning:, major), ✨ (:sparkles, minor), 🐛 (:bug:, patch), 📖 (:book:, docs), or 🌱 (:seedling:, other) -->

<!-- What does this do, and why do we need it? -->

Before this change, the webhook code was patching mutation or admission webhooks to point to the temporary URL and CA bundle generated when the webhook server would start.

Conversion webhooks are handled at the CRD level in Kubernetes, and we need to make sure to patch those client configurations as well.

This patch also unexports a lot of methods that should have been private from the very beginning, so it's marked as a breaking change.

Signed-off-by: Vince Prignano [email protected]

<!-- please add an icon to the title of this PR (see VERSIONING.md), and delete this line and similar ones --> <!-- the icon will be either ⚠ (:warning:, major), ✨ (:sparkles, minor), 🐛 (:bug:, patch), 📖 (:book:, docs), or 🌱 (:seedling:, other) -->

<!-- What does this do, and why do we need it? -->

/assign @alvaroaleman @DirectXMan12

@vincepri: The following tests failed, say /retest to rerun all failed tests:

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard. Please help us cut down on flakes by linking to an open issue when you hit one in your PR.

<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/test-infra repository. I understand the commands that are listed here. </details> <!-- test report -->

New changes are detected. LGTM label has been removed.

@vincepri: The following tests failed, say /retest to rerun all failed tests:

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard. Please help us cut down on flakes by linking to an open issue when you hit one in your PR.

<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/test-infra repository. I understand the commands that are listed here. </details> <!-- test report -->

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: <a href="https://github.com/kubernetes-sigs/controller-runtime/pull/1525#pullrequestreview-660226521" title="Approved">DirectXMan12</a>, <a href="https://github.com/kubernetes-sigs/controller-runtime/pull/1525#" title="Author self-approved">vincepri</a>

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

The pull request process is described here

<details > Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• OWNERS [DirectXMan12,vincepri]

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment </details> <!-- META={"approvers":[]} -->

@vincepri: The following test failed, say /retest to rerun all failed tests:

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard. Please help us cut down on flakes by linking to an open issue when you hit one in your PR.

<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/test-infra repository. I understand the commands that are listed here. </details> <!-- test report -->

@rfranzke now that the first TokenReview is merged do you think we could add another issue to track the authorization webhook? Also is that something you're interested in adding?

@coderanger do you think it makes sense to make another issue to track doing the audit webhook support?

@vincepri: The following tests failed, say /retest to rerun all failed tests:

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard. Please help us cut down on flakes by linking to an open issue when you hit one in your PR.

<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/test-infra repository. I understand the commands that are listed here. </details> <!-- test report -->

if it's not too complicated

(i.e. don't re-call if we've already called it, but if someone's using it standalone still call)

maybe make this call conditional so we don't break people if anyone's using it manually

theoretically it could be not convert if you don't go through the builder, but I'm not sure how much we need to worry about that ATM.