missing required field "containers" in com.rabbitmq.v1beta1.RabbitmqCluster.spec.override.statefulSet.spec.template.spec

[alexey-gavrilov-flant]

Describe the bug

containers should not be a required parameter

To Reproduce

Steps to reproduce the behavior:

apiVersion: rabbitmq.com/v1beta1
kind: RabbitmqCluster
metadata:
  name: test
spec:
  override:
    statefulSet:
      spec:
        template:
          spec:
            priorityClassName: production-medium

Include any YAML or manifest necessary to reproduce the problem.

Expected behavior
I don't want to override containers

Version and environment information

• RabbitMQ: [latest]
• RabbitMQ Cluster Operator: [2.0.0]
• Kubernetes: [1.21.0]
• Cloud provider or hardware configuration:

Additional context

error: error validating "/tmp/00.yaml": error validating data: ValidationError(RabbitmqCluster.spec.override.statefulSet.spec.template.spec): missing required field "containers" in com.rabbitmq.v1beta1.RabbitmqCluster.spec.override.statefulSet.spec.template.spec; if you choose to ignore these errors, turn validation off with --validate=false

[alexey-gavrilov-flant]

apiVersion: rabbitmq.com/v1beta1
kind: RabbitmqCluster
metadata:
  name: test
spec:
  override:
    statefulSet:
      spec:
        template:
          spec:
            priorityClassName: production-medium
            containers:
            - name: empty
              image: nginx:1.23.3-alpine-slim
              securityContext:
                runAsUser: 0

here is a working version, but it looks ugly

[Zerpet]

This limitation is imposed by Kubernetes StatefulSet admission controller. We "borrowed" the core StatefulSet structure to get validation "for free", instead of re-writing all those rules in our controller.

You don't have to override the containers, you can just use the empty set []. The operator will create the rabbitmq container anyway. Check out this example as reference:

https://github.com/rabbitmq/cluster-operator/blob/main/docs/examples/default-security-context/rabbitmq.yaml

[Zerpet]

I will convert this issue to a GitHub discussion. Currently GitHub will automatically close and lock the issue even though your question will be transferred and responded to elsewhere. This is to let you know that we do not intend to ignore this but this is how the current GitHub conversion mechanism makes it seem for the users :(