[kuberay] RayJob CRD is missing support for deletion policies based on job status

[cmontemuino]

Name and Version

bitnami/kuberay 1.4.18

What is the problem this feature will solve?

RayJob CRD is outdated:
https://github.com/bitnami/charts/blob/7bc8596d62919e525934e5847e5106713543e155/bitnami/kuberay/crds/ray.io_rayjobs.yaml#L63-L68

Changes from the upstream's ray-project/kuberay#3731 needs to be applied.

              deletionStrategy:
                 properties:
                   onFailure:
                     properties:
                       policy:
                         type: string
                         x-kubernetes-validations:
                         - message: the policy field value must be either 'DeleteCluster',
                             'DeleteWorkers', 'DeleteSelf', or 'DeleteNone'
                           rule: self in ['DeleteCluster', 'DeleteWorkers', 'DeleteSelf',
                             'DeleteNone']
                     required:
                     - policy
                     type: object
                   onSuccess:
                     properties:
                       policy:
                         type: string
                         x-kubernetes-validations:
                         - message: the policy field value must be either 'DeleteCluster',
                             'DeleteWorkers', 'DeleteSelf', or 'DeleteNone'
                           rule: self in ['DeleteCluster', 'DeleteWorkers', 'DeleteSelf',
                             'DeleteNone']
                     required:
                     - policy
                     type: object
                 required:
                 - onFailure
                 - onSuccess
                 type: object

What is the feature you are proposing to solve the problem?

Update the CRD

What alternatives have you considered?

No response

[cmontemuino]

I have #34793 which is also tackling an outdated value with upstream's chart. Is it ok to reuse the chart version from that PR (i.e., 1.4.19)?
Or should I wait for the PR to be merged and then open a new one targeting version 1.4.20?

[carrodher]

Thank you for bringing this issue to our attention. We appreciate your involvement! If you're interested in contributing a solution, feel free to start the PR directly with the same version as the other PR (1.4.19). Since PR review is assigned to different people within the team, we don't know beforehand which PR is going to be merged first. In any case, we will need to rebase from main the second one.