Fix webhook typo, add podLabels, add podEnv to flyte-core Helm chart

[ddl-ebrown]

Tracking issue

https://github.com/flyteorg/flyte/issues/

Why are the changes needed?

Hopefully this isn't too controversial a change. To deploy in our environments, we've standardized on the use of podAnnotations, podLabels and podEnv helm values. Globally, this allows for setting values across all deployment, statefulset and daemonset resources.

What changes were proposed in this pull request?

Flyte already has podAnnotations, but not podLabels or podEnv. This PR adds both to flyte-core.

Of not, flyteadmin has a env: [] value set already, but it's the only one. I didn't want to break anything so left it as-is. Ideally I think that would become podEnv: {} and would render in the same way as the other charts.

How was this patch tested?

make helm was used locally to generate charts / docs. I set values explicitly in the values.yaml to verify correct rendering

i.e.

podEnv:
  - name: TEST
    value: value

Setup process

Screenshots

Check all the applicable boxes

• I updated the documentation accordingly.
• All new and existing tests passed.
• All commits are signed-off.

Related PRs

Docs link

[welcome]

Thank you for opening this pull request! 🙌

These tips will help get your PR across the finish line:

• Most of the repos have a PR template; if not, fill it out to the best of your knowledge.
• Sign off your commits (Reference: DCO Guide).

[ddl-ebrown]

I tested setting the podLabels / podEnv, ran make helm locally and generated some templates / made sure they were correct

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Comparison is base (5300e1b) 58.17% compared to head (174dd91) 58.18%.
Report is 4 commits behind head on master.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #4756      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   58.17%   58.18%   +0.01%     
==========================================
  Files         626      626              
  Lines       53833    53833              
==========================================
+ Hits        31315    31322       +7     
+ Misses      20010    20003       -7     
  Partials     2508     2508              

Flag	Coverage Δ
unittests	58.18% <ø> (+0.01%)	⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[ddl-ebrown]

@davidmirror-ops any chance you would be able to have a look at this one? Thanks!

[davidmirror-ops]

Thanks @ddl-ebrown!
This is very helpful not only for consistent config but eventually even for observability use cases I think. I'm also curious about the actual use case that led your org to standardize on these keys.

BTW, please consider signing up for the weekly community raffle, this contribution would give you points!

[ddl-ebrown]

Cool thanks @davidmirror-ops!

We use annotations specifically for things like Istio and Prometheus. Clearly, they're useful for many different operators.

We primarily use labels for configuring network policy. So pods marked with foo-client are allowed to talk to pods using a pretty basic selector matching mechanism.

podEnv can be injected at deployment time using values from the Helmfile config. I'm actually not sure what we're using those for, but it is a standard that we adopted.