fix: claimSecret.key reference check#162
Merged
cilindrox merged 1 commit intoplexinc:masterfrom Nov 27, 2025
Merged
Conversation
cilindrox
changed the title
Member
|
This will ship in v1.3.0 alongside #161 |
cilindrox
pushed a commit
to izphi78/pms-docker
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 27, 2025
Rename claimSecret.value -> claimSecret.key conditional check in the `statefulset.yaml` template.
Member
|
This has shipped on v1.3.0 - thanks @a1gemmel |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
In the
values.yamlfile and below here instatefulset.yamlin lines 137/138 the referenced parameters arepms.claimSecret.nameandpms.claimSecret.key, but thisifblock is checking for the existence ofpms.claimSecret.value- referenced nowhere else. This seems like a simple typing mistake.Verified on my homelab deployment of plex via argocd.
For now I just use a workaround of setting
valueto a dummy value so the template block executes.