[RHOAIENG-18422] Support custom namespace field for Workbenches

[robotmaxtron]

Adding user defined namespace option to WorkbenchesCommonSpec and controller actions

Updating api docs to include a new field for namespace configuration of workbenches

Including updated crd bases for workbench,dsc to include the workbench namespace field

Adding updated workbench manifests

Adding validation to prevent updating WorkbenchNamespace field in the DSC

Updated CRD bases for WorkbenchNamespace validation

Description

Adding a field to the DSC to allow workbench namespace configuration when the component is enabled.

https://issues.redhat.com/browse/RHOAIENG-18422

How Has This Been Tested?

Built and deployed the image to a 4.17 cluster and used the namespace custom-wb-ns for the new field. The workbench component shows ready and is visible in the spec.

oc describe dsc
Name:         default
Namespace:
Labels:       <none>
Annotations:  <none>
API Version:  datasciencecluster.opendatahub.io/v1
Kind:         DataScienceCluster
Metadata:
  Creation Timestamp:  2025-02-28T14:20:59Z
  Generation:          1
  Resource Version:    23014527
  UID:                 1764e67e-7297-4f01-9e70-87722b2e4748
Spec:
  Components:
    Codeflare:
      Management State:  Removed
    Dashboard:
      Management State:  Managed
    Datasciencepipelines:
      Management State:  Managed
    Feastoperator:
    Kserve:
      Management State:  Removed
      Nim:
        Management State:  Managed
      Serving:
        Ingress Gateway:
          Certificate:
            Type:          OpenshiftDefaultIngress
        Management State:  Managed
        Name:              knative-serving
    Kueue:
    Modelmeshserving:
      Management State:  Managed
    Modelregistry:
      Registries Namespace:  odh-model-registries
    Ray:
      Management State:  Removed
    Trainingoperator:
    Trustyai:
    Workbenches:
      Management State:     Managed
      Workbench Namespace:  custom-wb-ns

Screenshot or short clip

Merge criteria

• You have read the contributors guide.
• Commit messages are meaningful - have a clear and concise summary and detailed explanation of what was changed and why.
• Pull Request contains a description of the solution, a link to the JIRA issue, and to any dependent or related Pull Request.
• Testing instructions have been added in the PR body (for PRs involving changes that are not immediately obvious).
• The developer has manually tested the changes and verified that the changes work

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 0% with 15 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 24.09%. Comparing base (89ce6d7) to head (c95794c).
Report is 3 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
...ents/workbenches/workbenches_controller_actions.go	0.00%	15 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #1753      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   24.10%   24.09%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files         172      172              
  Lines       11763    11767       +4     
==========================================
  Hits         2835     2835              
- Misses       8650     8654       +4     
  Partials      278      278              

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

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

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

[lphiri]

@robotmaxtron I still see hard coded prometheus configs with the rhods-notebook name. Ignore if irrelevant, but otherwise we need to account for these:

1. https://github.com/opendatahub-io/opendatahub-operator/blob/main/config/monitoring/prometheus/apps/prometheus-configs.yaml
2. https://github.com/opendatahub-io/opendatahub-operator/blob/main/config/monitoring/base/rhods-prometheusrules.yaml

[robotmaxtron]

@lphiri There are some other existing efforts to refactor the monitoring component, that will ultimately replace the configurations. With the default behavior remaining the same, I would not expect any issues with the existing configs.

[openshift-ci]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by:
Once this PR has been reviewed and has the lgtm label, please assign ugiordan 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