🌱 (test): Selector field exclusion in registry+v1 bundle configuration

[anik120]

Description

PR #2454 implemented the selector field exclusion in the schema generator and generated schema, but there was no explicit validation test demonstrating that users would receive a clear error message if they tried to use it. This PR introduces a test that:

1. Documents the behavior explicitly - Makes it clear through tests that selector is not just omitted, but actively rejected
2. Prevents regression - Ensures future schema changes don't accidentally allow the selector field
3. Validates user experience - Confirms users get a helpful error message rather than silent failure

Test Output

rawConfig: []byte(`{
    "deploymentConfig": {
        "selector": {
            "matchLabels": {
                "app": "test"
            }
        }
    }
}`),
expectedErrMessage: `unknown field "selector"`

Related

• PR ✨ Add automated schema generation and validation for registry+v1 bundle configuration #2454: Initial implementation of registry+v1 bundle schema generation
• Schema description already notes: "Note: The 'selector' field from v0's SubscriptionConfig is not included as it was never used."

Reviewer Checklist

• API Go Documentation
• Tests: Unit Tests (and E2E Tests, if appropriate)
• Comprehensive Commit Messages
• Links to related GitHub Issue(s)

[netlify]

✅ Deploy Preview for olmv1 ready!

Name	Link
🔨 Latest commit	5cb57ac
🔍 Latest deploy log	https://app.netlify.com/projects/olmv1/deploys/699e01ce4d14560008c3d3f6
😎 Deploy Preview	https://deploy-preview-2525--olmv1.netlify.app
📱 Preview on mobile	Toggle QR Code... Use your smartphone camera to open QR code link.

---

To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify project configuration.

[Copilot]

Pull request overview

This PR adds a test to ensure that the selector field (from OLMv0's SubscriptionConfig) is properly rejected when used in registry+v1 bundle configuration. The test validates that users receive a clear error message rather than experiencing silent failure or undefined behavior.

Changes:

• Adds a test case validating that selector field in deploymentConfig is rejected with a clear error message
• Complements PR #2454's implementation by explicitly documenting and testing the exclusion behavior

---

💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.

[tmshort]

/approve

[tmshort]

/lgtm

[openshift-ci]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: 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

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 72.09%. Comparing base (4121321) to head (5cb57ac).
⚠️ Report is 2 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #2525      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   72.15%   72.09%   -0.06%     
==========================================
  Files         103      103              
  Lines        8686     8686              
==========================================
- Hits         6267     6262       -5     
- Misses       1937     1940       +3     
- Partials      482      484       +2     

Flag	Coverage Δ
e2e	45.36% <ø> (+0.02%)	⬆️
experimental-e2e	53.82% <ø> (-0.10%)	⬇️
unit	57.12% <ø> (ø)

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.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

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