refactor!: move openshift.hostUsers to deployment.hostUsers

The PodSpec `hostUsers` field has nothing to do with the OpenShift compatibility profile. It only selects whether the
pod shares the host's user namespace, which is a plain Kubernetes feature. Nesting it below `openshift` implied that it
requires OpenShift and, worse, the helper only rendered it when `openshift.enabled` evaluated to `true`, so the setting
was silently ignored on vanilla Kubernetes clusters.

`gitea.hostUsers` now reads `deployment.hostUsers` and no longer depends on the OpenShift profile. The value is only
rendered when it is an actual boolean, so the field stays omitted for `null` and the platform default applies.

BREAKING CHANGE: `openshift.hostUsers` has been removed. Configure `deployment.hostUsers` instead.

Co-authored-by: Copilot <copilot@github.com>

templates/_helpers.tpl

@@ -101,13 +101,11 @@ false
 {{- end -}}
 
 {{/*
-Return the pod's hostUsers setting when OpenShift compatibility is enabled.
+Return the pod's hostUsers setting. Renders nothing unless explicitly set to a boolean.
 */}}
 {{- define "gitea.hostUsers" -}}
-{{- if eq (include "gitea.openshift.enabled" . | trim) "true" -}}
-{{- if kindIs "bool" .Values.openshift.hostUsers -}}
-{{ ternary "true" "false" .Values.openshift.hostUsers }}
-{{- end -}}
+{{- if kindIs "bool" .Values.deployment.hostUsers -}}
+{{ ternary "true" "false" .Values.deployment.hostUsers }}
 {{- end -}}
 {{- end -}}
 

templates/gitea/deprecation.yaml

@@ -75,6 +75,11 @@
     {{- fail "`nodeSelector` does no longer exist. Please refer to the changelog and configure `deployment.nodeSelector` instead." -}}
   {{- end -}}
 
+  {{/* OPENSHIFT HOST USERS */}}
+  {{- if hasKey .Values.openshift "hostUsers" -}}
+    {{- fail "`openshift.hostUsers` does no longer exist. Please refer to the changelog and configure `deployment.hostUsers` instead." -}}
+  {{- end -}}
+
   {{/* PRIORITY CLASS NAME */}}
   {{- if .Values.priorityClassName -}}
     {{- fail "`priorityClassName` does no longer exist. Please refer to the changelog and configure `deployment.priorityClassName` instead." -}}