OTEL Operator release 0.51.0

[erichsueh3]

Resolves #868 for operator release 0.51.0

[erichsueh3]

Couple of notes:

1. Is the lower bound on k8s supported versions now N-4 instead of N-2? If so, I can change that in RELEASE.md
2. While on the topic of k8s versions, should the range actually be 1.20-1.24 now? 1.24 was released 9 days ago, but 0.50 of the Operator release was 3 days ago and supports 1.19-1.23. If yes, then I can make the changes so the e2e and scorecard tests are for updated versions, as well as updating the versions on the README

[mat-rumian]

Could we please release with this fix #864?

[pavolloffay]

Is the lower bound on k8s supported versions now N-4 instead of N-2? If so, I can change that in RELEASE.md

https://github.com/open-telemetry/opentelemetry-operator#opentelemetry-operator-vs-kubernetes-vs-cert-manager

We strive to be compatible with the widest range of Kubernetes versions as possible, but some changes to Kubernetes itself require us to break compatibility with older Kubernetes versions, be it because of code incompatibilities, or in the name of maintainability. Every released operator will support a specific range of Kubernetes versions, to be determined at the latest during the release.

And https://github.com/open-telemetry/opentelemetry-operator/blob/main/.github/workflows/e2e.yaml#L15

Essentially we (community/maintainers) decide which versions of k8s are supported. There is not strict policy on N-X.

[pavolloffay]

While on the topic of k8s versions, should the range actually be 1.20-1.24 now? 1.24 was released 9 days ago, but 0.50 of the Operator release was 3 days ago and supports 1.19-1.23. If yes, then I can make the changes so the e2e and scorecard tests are for updated versions, as well as updating the versions on the README

Feel free to add support for 1.24 in a separate PR.

[pavolloffay]

@erichsueh3 please include #864 in the changelog.

[pavolloffay]

Also include #689 in the changelog

[erichsueh3]

Updated the changelog @pavolloffay @mat-rumian

[erichsueh3]

Can we re run the 1.19 e2e tests?

[bogdandrutu]

@erichsueh3 triggered the "re-run"

[pavolloffay]

@erichsueh3 please rebase the PR and the CI should pass.

[erichsueh3]

@pavolloffay rebased and now 1.19 tests pass but 1.23 tests fail, not sure why

[pavolloffay]

I have just re-run the tests. Did you re-run as well?

[pavolloffay]

passed, it was probably a flaky test