🌱 feat: add support for Podman as a container runtime

[camilamacedo86]

Since docker requires a license in some scenarios, we might have contributors who prefer to use Podman. This commit introduces the changes necessary to support both.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 38.23%. Comparing base (55689e8) to head (b1c5480).
Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main     #464   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   38.23%   38.23%           
=======================================
  Files          15       15           
  Lines        1224     1224           
=======================================
  Hits          468      468           
  Misses        706      706           
  Partials       50       50           

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

[m1kola]

Looks good to me. I personally just have a symlink from docker to podman in path, but we already have CONTAINER_RUNTIME in Makefile in operator-controller and I'm up for consistency.

Let's resolve the blocker #462 and go ahead with this one.

[joelanford]

If you are looking for a docker-based system on MacOS, I've been using colima successfully for quite awhile. It does not have the same license problems as the official Docker Desktop application and was more stable for me when I was trying to decide between podman desktop and colima.

I think it is fine to align this repo with operator-controller, but just be forewarned: the stance in operator-controller is that we do not and likely will not have CI setup for multiple container runtimes. Right now, we use docker officially, and podman is best-effort.

[m1kola]

Thanks for updating it. Looks good to me.