fix: "edit add labels" make labels handle -f flag same as commonLabels

[fktym]

kustomize edit add labels command modifies labels to handle the -f flag the same way as commonLabels. This change should also address one of the concerns raised in #4746 (comment).

Current Behavior:

• commonLabels: kustomize edit add labels name:value -f overwrites existing labels when using -f flag
• labels: kustomize edit add labels name:value -f --without-selector creates a new Labels entry even with -f flag

Fixed Behavior:

• labels: kustomize edit add labels name:value -f --without-selector overwrites existing labels when using -f flag

Note:

• When determining if labels are the same, we also check if the includeSelector and includeTemplates values match

This change unifies the -f flag behavior between commonLabels and labels. I needed this overwrite functionality as I use kustomize edit add labels in CI to update versions.

Related:
- #4746 (comment)
- #4486

[linux-foundation-easycla]

The committers listed above are authorized under a signed CLA.

• ✅ login: fktym (70e4d2e)

[k8s-ci-robot]

Welcome @fktym!

It looks like this is your first PR to kubernetes-sigs/kustomize 🎉. Please refer to our pull request process documentation to help your PR have a smooth ride to approval.

You will be prompted by a bot to use commands during the review process. Do not be afraid to follow the prompts! It is okay to experiment. Here is the bot commands documentation.

You can also check if kubernetes-sigs/kustomize has its own contribution guidelines.

You may want to refer to our testing guide if you run into trouble with your tests not passing.

If you are having difficulty getting your pull request seen, please follow the recommended escalation practices. Also, for tips and tricks in the contribution process you may want to read the Kubernetes contributor cheat sheet. We want to make sure your contribution gets all the attention it needs!

Thank you, and welcome to Kubernetes. 😃

[k8s-ci-robot]

Hi @fktym. Thanks for your PR.

I'm waiting for a kubernetes-sigs member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with /ok-to-test on its own line. Until that is done, I will not automatically test new commits in this PR, but the usual testing commands by org members will still work. Regular contributors should join the org to skip this step.

Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the ok-to-test label.

I understand the commands that are listed here.

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-sigs/prow repository.

[stormqueen1990]

/test all

[stormqueen1990]

Hi there, @fktym! 👋🏻

Thank you for your contribution!

I just have a small suggestion on this for enhanced usability. Other than that, LGTM.

[stormqueen1990]

Minor suggestion for usability:

Suggested change

	return fmt.Errorf("%s %s already in kustomization file", kind, k)
	return fmt.Errorf("%s %s already in kustomization file. Use --force to override.", kind, k)

[fktym]

@stormqueen1990 Thanks for the feedback!
Totally agree that it'll help with usability. I've made the changes - mind taking another look?

[varshaprasad96]

/lgtm
/approve

[k8s-ci-robot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: fktym, varshaprasad96

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

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• kustomize/OWNERS [varshaprasad96]

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

[fktym]

@varshaprasad96
Thanks for the LGTM! Sorry, it seems I changed the error message but forgot to update the test accordingly. I've fixed it now, please review again

[stormqueen1990]

/lgtm
/ok-to-test

Thanks @fktym!

[fktym]

Thank you for the review. Looking forward to the release!