Clear (existing) error cond from Subscription, once error resolved

[anik120]

Description of the change:

The func removeSubsCond takes in a list of pointers to Subscription objects, modifies the
objects that the pointers point to, but return a new list of those pointers. A PR included in
the v0.25.0 release changed the way the output of that function was being used leading to a regression.
This PR fixes the removeSubsCond function, fixing the regression as a result.

Motivation for the change:

Closes #3162

Reviewer Checklist

• Implementation matches the proposed design, or proposal is updated to match implementation
• Sufficient unit test coverage
• Sufficient end-to-end test coverage
• Bug fixes are accompanied by regression test(s)
• e2e tests and flake fixes are accompanied evidence of flake testing, e.g. executing the test 100(0) times
• tech debt/todo is accompanied by issue link(s) in comments in the surrounding code
• Tests are comprehensible, e.g. Ginkgo DSL is being used appropriately
• Docs updated or added to /doc
• Commit messages sensible and descriptive
• Tests marked as [FLAKE] are truly flaky and have an issue
• Code is properly formatted

[tmshort]

/retest

[tmshort]

/retest

[tmshort]

Generally looks good to me. But @m1kola has some quyestions.

[anik120]

/retest

@tmshort there was a change I needed to do in the e2e test to reflect "BundleUnpacking cond is now removed instead of being set to false" in the e2e test 😅 Made that change, all tests should pass now.

[tmshort]

/lgtm
/approve

[m1kola]

I'm a bit on the fence about removing the condition instead of setting it to False (see comments below), but other than that - looks good.

[m1kola]

If we want to keep the condition, I think alternative fix will be something like this:

Suggested change

	o.removeSubsCond(subs, v1alpha1.SubscriptionBundleUnpacking)
	o.setSubsCond(subs, v1alpha1.SubscriptionCondition{
	Type: v1alpha1.SubscriptionBundleUnpacking,
	Status: corev1.ConditionFalse,
	})

Because setSubsCond returns a new slice of pointers containing updated subs only (similar to old implementation of removeSubsCond).

[m1kola]

Removing condition can potentially break clients, but given the fact:

1. It is relatively recent change
2. And not consistent with other conditions

I think it might be ok to remove it.

[anik120]

My vote would be to remove it. Reasons I say that are:

• When I asked around I wasn't able to get a "a user asked for it and hence it was added in there" answer.
• Which feeds into the doubts about the usefulness of clients needing to know if BundleUnpacking is true or false. As opposed to for example, the usefulness of clients needing to know if ResolutionFailed is true or false.

[m1kola]

Ship it!

[openshift-ci]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: anik120, m1kola, tmshort

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 [tmshort]

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