fix: backport label allowlisting to enable seamless downgrades from 1.1+

[saurav-agarwalla]

Fixes #N/A

Description
Backport nodeclaim label allowlisting to unblock downgrades from 1.1+.

How was this change tested?
Created nodeclaims using 1.2.1 and then downgraded to 1.0.8. Without this change, nodeclaims were stuck since the spec was invalid as per the downgraded CRD. With this change, the nodeclaims were unblocked.

Does this change impact docs?

• Yes, PR includes docs updates
• Yes, issue opened: #
• No

By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the Apache 2.0 license.

[coveralls]

Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 13534922031

Details

• 0 of 0 changed or added relevant lines in 0 files are covered.
• No unchanged relevant lines lost coverage.
• Overall coverage remained the same at 79.298%

---

Totals
Change from base Build 11712454428:	0.0%
Covered Lines:	6033
Relevant Lines:	7608

---

💛 - Coveralls

[saurav-agarwalla]

/karpenter snapshot

[jonathan-innis]

Makes sense -- I will note that downgrading CRDs is generally not recommended because you can drop data generally -- maybe we should rethink the way that we are recommending downgrades, but I think it can be potentially be dangerous to downgrade CRDs because upgrades are backwards-compatible, but downgrades aren't guaranteed to be

[saurav-agarwalla]

Makes sense -- I will note that downgrading CRDs is generally not recommended because you can drop data generally -- maybe we should rethink the way that we are recommending downgrades, but I think it can be potentially be dangerous to downgrade CRDs because upgrades are backwards-compatible, but downgrades aren't guaranteed to be

Yeah, this is what I brought up with the team. I don't think we should set expectations that downgrades are supported since there are so many things that could go wrong and it isn't really the convention for other K8s components. That said, I think we could take this as an exception until we formalize our version support matrix and our downgrade policy.

[saurav-agarwalla]

/karpenter snapshot

[jonathan-innis]

That said, I think we could take this as an exception until we formalize our version support matrix and our downgrade policy.

Fair enough. It's probably been more implicit than explicit at this point. Sounds like a note we should add to our upgrade guide. Agree that this change seems easy enough to reason about.

[jmdeal]

LGTM 🚀