[kube-prometheus-stack] rename additionalPrometheusRules prefix

[TheRealNoob]

What this PR does / why we need it

Rename prefix on additionalPrometheusRules. I'm not sure why the prefix is currently set to the chart name and not the release name. I feel like it should be the release name to avoid conflicts. Thoughts?

Which issue this PR fixes

I didn't open one.

Special notes for your reviewer

Although I bumped the Major version, I don't see it as strictly necessary. Yes the PrometheusRule objects will be destroyed and re-created under a new name, but to Operator that shouldn't make a difference. Not unless you've written your own operator, or something unique like that. But, it's just as easy to play it safe here and bump it anyway, so I have.

Checklist

• DCO signed
• Chart Version bumped
• Title of the PR starts with chart name (e.g. [prometheus-couchdb-exporter])

[jkroepke]

Hi, i'm on mobile right now, but maybe there is a git blame info to identity a reason for this.

I have also the 63 char length in mind for kubernetes which is not covered yet.

From conflict point of view: the resources are namespaced scoped and not sure if they conflict.

[TheRealNoob]

hmm that's a really good thought. I had a look. It looks like there's only 2 commits on the history for this file. The first one was the migration 5 years from prometheus-operator to kube-prometheus-stack. The second one is more interesting, but also 4 years ago. It added a metadata.name to the List object and did implement fullname over name, but didn't touch the nested PrometheusRule objects.

Helm 3 came out 6 years ago and this history goes back nearly that far, so my guess would be it has been this way since the migration from helm 2. Probably not a lot of people using this template so it doesn't see much change.

[TheRealNoob]

addressed the concerns about trunc 63. I had thought about it as well, I just wanted to make sure maintainers would be open to this change. I'm sure other changes need to be made in preparation for a Major bump?

[TheRealNoob]

@jkroepke do you have any other concerns? Are there any others that may need to be consulted? If you think a major version bump makes the most sense, are there any other changes that need to be made?