• Breaking change?
  Yes. Strict configuration validation has been added. Applications with missing or malformed rbac, auth, or kafka sections in the YAML configuration may fail to start or fail during runtime validation. Existing configurations may require updates.

Yes. This introduces stricter configuration validation at startup and during runtime. Applications with missing or malformed rbac, auth, or kafka sections in the YAML config will fail to start or trigger validation errors. Migration may require updating configuration files to match the expected structure.

What changes did you make? (Give an overview)

• Added comprehensive startup configuration validation for YAML structure, RBAC, authentication, and Kafka cluster sections.
• Enhanced RBAC validation to ensure roles are defined and typos in section names are caught.
• Added HealthIndicator implementation to reflect configuration validity and validation-in-progress status.
• Updated REST endpoints for validating and applying new configurations (restartWithConfig, validateConfig) with full validation.
• Introduced helper methods for checking cluster validation and YAML section presence.
• Improved logging for configuration validation failures.
• Ensured atomic flags are used to manage validation state.

Is there anything you'd like reviewers to focus on?

• Correctness of RBAC and YAML structure validation logic.
• Thread-safety of configValid and validationInProgress flags.
• Proper handling of cluster validation and fallback mechanisms.
• Error handling and logging clarity for startup and runtime validation failures.

How Has This Been Tested? (put an "x" (case-sensitive!) next to an item)

• No need to
• Manually (tested with valid and invalid YAML configs, missing sections, and cluster validation failures)
• Unit checks
• Integration checks
• Covered by existing automation

Checklist (put an "x" (case-sensitive!) next to all the items, otherwise the build will fail)

• I have performed a self-review of my own code
• I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
• I have made corresponding changes to the documentation (e.g., ENVIRONMENT VARIABLES)
• My changes generate no new warnings (e.g., Sonar is happy)
• I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works
• New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes
• Any dependent changes have been merged

Check out Contributing and Code of Conduct

A picture of a cute animal (not mandatory but encouraged)