Add extra field to Abstract AppArmorProfile spec

[Edan-Hamilton]

What type of PR is this?

/kind api-change

What this PR does / why we need it:

Adds an "extra" field to the Abstract spec, which allows including additional AppArmor parameters. This is important for handling edge-cases not (yet) covered by the spec.

Which issue(s) this PR fixes:

Fixes #2678

Does this PR have test?

N/A

Special notes for your reviewer:

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?

Added "extra" field to Abstract AppArmorProfiles

[k8s-ci-robot]

Hi @Edan-Hamilton. 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.

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 23.57%. Comparing base (11d77f4) to head (3ff9cf7).
Report is 861 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #2784       +/-   ##
===========================================
- Coverage   45.50%   23.57%   -21.93%     
===========================================
  Files          79      119       +40     
  Lines        7782    20272    +12490     
===========================================
+ Hits         3541     4779     +1238     
- Misses       4099    15254    +11155     
- Partials      142      239       +97     

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

[saschagrunert]

/ok-to-test

[saschagrunert]

CI does not seem to be happy about this:

Error: api/apparmorprofile/v1alpha1/apparmorprofile_types.go:85:1: File is not properly formatted (gci)
	Extra string `json:"extra,omitempty"`
^

[Edan-Hamilton]

CI does not seem to be happy about this:

Error: api/apparmorprofile/v1alpha1/apparmorprofile_types.go:85:1: File is not properly formatted (gci)
	Extra string `json:"extra,omitempty"`
^

Looks like it just wanted a comment above the new field. Fixed

[ccojocar]

/test all

[ccojocar]

@Edan-Hamilton Please could you fix the build failure? I think you need to regenerate the deployment manifests with make deployments. Thanks

[k8s-ci-robot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: Edan-Hamilton
Once this PR has been reviewed and has the lgtm label, please assign saschagrunert for approval. For more information see the Code Review Process.

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

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• OWNERS

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

[k8s-ci-robot]

@Edan-Hamilton: The following test failed, say /retest to rerun all failed tests or /retest-required to rerun all mandatory failed tests:

Test name	Commit	Details	Required	Rerun command
pull-security-profiles-operator-verify	83c25c9	link	true	/test pull-security-profiles-operator-verify

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard. Please help us cut down on flakes by linking to an open issue when you hit one in your PR.

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. I understand the commands that are listed here.

[k8s-triage-robot]

The Kubernetes project currently lacks enough contributors to adequately respond to all PRs.

This bot triages PRs according to the following rules:

• After 90d of inactivity, lifecycle/stale is applied
• After 30d of inactivity since lifecycle/stale was applied, lifecycle/rotten is applied
• After 30d of inactivity since lifecycle/rotten was applied, the PR is closed

You can:

• Mark this PR as fresh with /remove-lifecycle stale
• Close this PR with /close
• Offer to help out with Issue Triage

Please send feedback to sig-contributor-experience at kubernetes/community.

/lifecycle stale