✅ Deploy Preview for zarf-docs canceled.

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 83.09859% with 12 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Nice work so far! Since this PR is strictly removing code rather than adding code can you delete the test cases involving an already patched Zarf agent, both existing and new

So the thought process in why I added the tests for patching even if they already have the labels is so that it leaves some tests for future developers to not remove that functionality... I can remove the tests if you would still like

@a1994sc Yeah we should delete the tests related to the Zarf agent patch. We don't want to test code that isn't there.

One thing I originally didn't consider was that as the code is right now for the Helm repo and OCI repo it will not be idempotent. This is because after the original mutation occurs, we will have another mutation. Because Zarf adds a checksum to repos and images that it points to, we would re-mutate the url and add another, now incorrect, checksum. There is logic in the argocd, and flux-gitrepo webhooks to address this

As an example, this is the test you would add to the flux-gitrepo_test.go to test this behavior

		{
			name: "should not mutate URL if it has the same hostname as Zarf state",
			admissionReq: createFluxGitRepoAdmissionRequest(t, v1.Update, &flux.GitRepository{
				Spec: flux.GitRepositorySpec{
					URL: "https://git-server.com/a-push-user/podinfo-1646971829.git",
				},
			}),
			patch: []operations.PatchOperation{
				operations.ReplacePatchOperation(
					"/spec/url",
					"https://git-server.com/a-push-user/podinfo-1646971829.git",
				),
				operations.AddPatchOperation(
					"/spec/secretRef",
					fluxmeta.LocalObjectReference{Name: config.ZarfGitServerSecretName},
				),
				operations.ReplacePatchOperation(
					"/metadata/labels",
					map[string]string{
						"zarf-agent": "patched",
					},
				),
			},
			code: http.StatusOK,
		},

Thank you Austin, I will update the PR to apply the changes!

@AustinAbro321 Hey, updated the PR to remove the extra tests and added the logic for checking the url against the zarf state registry url. Let me know if that is good