feat: add warning for olm.properties being defined when validating csv

[tylerslaton]

Summary

To sufficiently address this BZ, this PR adds a warning when a user has defined the same property in the CSV's olm.properties annotation as well as in a properties.yaml. This will act as a soft barrier to users doing this in the future.

Why this is needed

As the olm.properties annotation currently exists to just maintain backwards compatibility, we should warn newly created bundles from using it. Instead, it is a good idea to push them to use the metadata/properties.yaml file.

[kevinrizza]

Just a small nit, otherwise this lgtm

[ankitathomas]

/lgtm

[dinhxuanvu]

Looking good. Just one small request.

[dinhxuanvu]

/approve

[openshift-ci]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: dinhxuanvu, tylerslaton

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

The pull request process is described here

Details

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• OWNERS [dinhxuanvu]

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

[camilamacedo86]

/hold

1. Could we not address this one by:

a) In the CSV validator check if properties are defined and then if yes warning asking to use the file properties instead?
b) In the bundle validator check if the CSV and the properties file are defining the same property? If yes, then raise an error because the bundle is defining the same value twice.

After some thoughts about this scenario, I think that it should not be specific to the max OCP version and we could generalize better this one. Also, by doing the above suggestions seems that we would be able to properly solve the BZ by not allowing any duplications.

[tylerslaton]

/hold

1. Could we not address this one by:

a) In the CSV validator check if properties are defined and then if yes warning asking to use the file properties instead? b) In the bundle validator check if the CSV and the properties file are defining the same property? If yes, then raise an error because the bundle is defining the same value twice.

After some thoughts about this scenario, I think that it should not be specific to the max OCP version and we could generalize better this one. Also, by doing the above suggestions seems that we would be able to properly solve the BZ by not allowing any duplications.

Hi Camilla, so a couple of things.

1. I believe that this PR already satisfies your first point. If you define olm.properties in the CSV's annotation then a warning will be thrown asking the user to define it in metadata/properties.yaml instead.
2. With this ^ in mind, would it make sense to get this PR merged and then address your second point?

[camilamacedo86]

/hold cancel

@tylerslaton
You are right
/lgtm
/approved