* Proposal: service accounts creation should be decoupled from PodSecurityPolicy.
* Rename *-rbac.yaml to *-psp.yaml and move service account to *-service-account.yaml
* Test with psp enabled
Co-authored-by: Lari Hotari <lhotari@apache.org>
It remains possible to override the current release namespace by setting
the `namespace` value though this may lead to having the helm metadata
and the pulsar components in different namespaces
Fixes#66
### Motivation
Trying to deploy the chart in a namespace using the usual helm pattern fails for example
```
kubectl create ns pulsartest
helm upgrade --install pulsar -n pulsartest apache/pulsar
Error: namespaces "pulsar" not found
```
fixing that while keeping the helm metadata and the deployed objects in the same namespace requires declaring the namespace twice
```
kubectl create ns pulsartest
helm upgrade --install pulsar -n pulsartest apache/pulsar --set namespace=pulsartest
Error: namespaces "pulsar" not found
```
This is needlessly confusing for newcomers who follow the helm documentation and is contrary to helm best practices.
### Modifications
I changed the chart to use the context namespace `.Release.Namespace` by default while preserving the ability to override that by explicitly providing a namespace on the commande line, with the this modification both examples behave as expected
### Verifying this change
- [x] Make sure that the change passes the CI checks.
### Motivation
We need to be able to change annotation to inject AWS IAM role (EKS based deployment).
https://docs.aws.amazon.com/eks/latest/userguide/specify-service-account-role.html
With 2.6.0 and this annotation change we were able to use Tiered Storage with S3 and EKS/IAM(OIDC).
e.g :
```
annotations:
eks.amazonaws.com/role-arn: arn:aws:iam::66666:role/my-iam-role-with-s3-access
```
values.yaml
```
broker:
service_account:
annotations:
eks.amazonaws.com/role-arn: arn:aws:iam::66666:role/my-iam-role-with-s3-access
```
### Modifications
Added a value to allow to change annotations fro broker service account.
I've tried following style from other part of the code.
### Verifying this change
- [ ] Make sure that the change passes the CI checks.
