Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

feat(shield): rename monitoring and responding keys #2100

Conversation

aroberts87
Copy link
Collaborator

What this PR does / why we need it:

The Host Shield has had the 'features.monitoring' and 'features.responding' configuration keys renamed to be the following:

  • features.monitor
  • features.respond

This PR is to adjust the shield chart accordingly.

Checklist

  • Title of the PR starts with type and scope, (e.g. feat(agent,node-analyzer,sysdig-deploy):)
  • Chart Version bumped for the respective charts
  • Variables are documented in the README.md (or README.tpl in some charts)
  • Check GithubAction checks (like lint) to avoid merge-check stoppers
  • All test files are added in the tests folder of their respective chart and have a "_test" suffix

The Host Shield has had the 'features.monitoring' and 'features.responding'
configuration keys renamed to be the following:

* features.monitor
* features.respond

This PR is to adjust the shield chart accordingly.
@aroberts87 aroberts87 self-assigned this Jan 6, 2025
@aroberts87 aroberts87 requested a review from a team as a code owner January 6, 2025 19:05
revert this field back to the previous state of 'true'.
the revert will prevent the key rename from being a chart
level breaking change.
…and-responding-keys

# Conflicts:
#	charts/shield/Chart.yaml
@aroberts87 aroberts87 merged commit 0d9dedf into main Jan 14, 2025
4 checks passed
@aroberts87 aroberts87 deleted the aroberts/feat/smgent-8549-rename-monitoring-and-responding-keys branch January 14, 2025 15:04
aroberts87 added a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 14, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants