feat: add support for attaching ephemeral containers (debug containers)

[KyriosGN0]

Signed-off-by: AvivGuiser avivguiser@gmail.com

Checklist:

• Either (a) I've created an enhancement proposal and discussed it with the community, (b) this is a bug fix, or (c) this does not need to be in the release notes.
• The title of the PR states what changed and the related issues number (used for the release note).
• The title of the PR conforms to the Title of the PR
• I've included "Closes [ISSUE #]" or "Fixes [ISSUE #]" in the description to automatically close the associated issue.
• I've updated both the CLI and UI to expose my feature, or I plan to submit a second PR with them.
• Does this PR require documentation updates?
• I've updated documentation as required by this PR.
• I have signed off all my commits as required by DCO
• I have written unit and/or e2e tests for my change. PRs without these are unlikely to be merged.
• My build is green (troubleshooting builds).
• [] My new feature complies with the feature status guidelines.
• I have added a brief description of why this PR is necessary and/or what this PR solves.
• Optional. My organization is added to USERS.md.
• Optional. For bug fixes, I've indicated what older releases this fix should be cherry-picked into (this may or may not happen depending on risk/complexity).

This PR add a new tab on argocd UI to create ephemeral containers that can attach to existing container's namespaces (or be launched in the same pod as them but they won't share the namespace and won't see the other containers processes). Fixes #11103, #24761

[bunnyshell]

❌ Preview Environment undeployed from Bunnyshell

Available commands (reply to this comment):

• 🚀 /bns:deploy to deploy the environment

[codecov]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 23.87387% with 169 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 63.21%. Comparing base (cbbb19d) to head (635ee06).
⚠️ Report is 427 commits behind head on master.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
server/application/debug.go	20.95%	163 Missing and 3 partials ⚠️
util/settings/settings.go	50.00%	1 Missing and 2 partials ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master   #27124      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   62.78%   63.21%   +0.42%     
==========================================
  Files         414      416       +2     
  Lines       56022    56767     +745     
==========================================
+ Hits        35176    35883     +707     
- Misses      17494    17503       +9     
- Partials     3352     3381      +29     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[blakepettersson]

@KyriosGN0 I think this is a great feature! I do think this is something which needs to be discussed with other maintainers though, whether through a more formal proposal or at the very least on a contributors' meeting. Would you be available to discuss tomorrow @ 5pm CEST?

[KyriosGN0]

@KyriosGN0 I think this is a great feature! I do think this is something which needs to be discussed with other maintainers though, whether through a more formal proposal or at the very least on a contributors' meeting. Would you be available to discuss tomorrow @ 5pm CEST?

Unfortunately no its about 3 in the morning for me
Is there a format for how the proposal flow works?

[KyriosGN0]

@blakepettersson i see its 8 am PT, so i can join

[KyriosGN0]

hey @blakepettersson, is there something i need to do after the contributor meeting?

[blakepettersson]

Hi @KyriosGN0 I sadly needed to leave before your issue was brought up. What was the outcome of the discussion in regards to this?

I wanted to bring up that I think at the very least the image list should be able to be configured on a project-level

[KyriosGN0]

Hi @KyriosGN0 I sadly needed to leave before your issue was brought up. What was the outcome of the discussion in regards to this?

I wanted to bring up that I think at the very least the image list should be able to be configured on a project-level

@blakepettersson mainly around security (due to the use of the terminal like the exec feature), i was told that a deeper look at the pr is needed
regarding your point, do you mean in the AppProject CRD? or via config flag in argocd cm ?

[blakepettersson]

regarding your point, do you mean in the AppProject CRD

Yes exactly. Although I don't know if there'll be general agreement amongst maintainers which is why I think we should try to codify the desired behavior through a proposal, especially given the point below

mainly around security (due to the use of the terminal like the exec feature), i was told that a deeper look at the pr is needed

You can see a template of how a proposal generally looks here: https://github.com/argoproj/argo-cd/blob/master/docs/proposals/001-proposal-template.md

[KyriosGN0]

master/docs/proposals/001-proposal-template.md

@blakepettersson should the proposal be its own PR?

[blakepettersson]

master/docs/proposals/001-proposal-template.md

@blakepettersson should the proposal be its own PR?

Yes it should

[KyriosGN0]

@blakepettersson created #27366 (its a thin proposal)