fix: enable multiple container hooks

[mledd]

Fixes: #8356
Related: #9076

Description

Currently container deploy hooks only execute the first element from the list of post deploy hooks

This fix adds an index to the loop over the range of hooks so that all container post hooks can be uniquely added to the range of hooks to be run.

Updating filterContainersSelector to accept this index, allowing for the expansion of the key format to include the hook index.

Updated applicable unit test case for the fixed behavior.

[gemini-code-assist]

Summary of Changes

Hello @mleddy-NS1, I'm Gemini Code Assist¹! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed!

This pull request introduces a crucial change to how Skaffold handles multiple container hooks during deployment. By adding an index to the hook iteration and incorporating it into the container filtering mechanism, the system can now uniquely identify and process each hook. This resolves an issue where identical container hooks might have been incorrectly skipped or mishandled, leading to more robust and predictable hook execution.

Highlights

• Hook Indexing: The loop iterating over deployment hooks now includes an index, allowing for better differentiation between multiple hooks.
• Container Selector Key Expansion: The filterContainersSelector function has been updated to accept and incorporate the new hook index into its key generation, preventing conflicts when multiple container hooks are present.
• Test Coverage: A new test case has been added to deploy_test.go to validate the correct behavior of multiple container hooks, ensuring the fix works as expected.

🧠 New Feature in Public Preview: You can now enable Memory to help Gemini Code Assist learn from your team's feedback. This makes future code reviews more consistent and personalized to your project's style. Click here to enable Memory in your admin console.

Using Gemini Code Assist

The full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips.

Invoking Gemini

You can request assistance from Gemini at any point by creating a comment using either /gemini <command> or @gemini-code-assist <command>. Below is a summary of the supported commands on the current page.

Feature	Command	Description
Code Review	/gemini review	Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state.
Pull Request Summary	/gemini summary	Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state.
Comment	@gemini-code-assist	Responds in comments when explicitly tagged, both in pull request comments and review comments.
Help	/gemini help	Displays a list of available commands.

Customization

To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a .gemini/ folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.

Limitations & Feedback

Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for Github and other Google products, sign up here.

You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension.

Footnotes

1. Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configure Gemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution. ↩

[gemini-code-assist]

Code Review

This pull request correctly fixes an issue where only the first of multiple container hooks on the same container would be executed in subsequent dev loops by including the hook's index in the tracking key. However, I've identified a potential issue where hooks could still be skipped if pods in different namespaces share the same name. I've suggested a small change to include the namespace in the key to ensure its uniqueness across the cluster.