fix(repo): Repository settings have been updated to accomodate deb key change

[waynegemmell]

PR progress checklist (to be filled in by reviewers)

• Changes to documentation are appropriate (or tick if not required)
• Changes to tests are appropriate (or tick if not required)
• Reviews completed

---

What type of PR is this?

Primary type

• [build] Changes related to the build system
• [chore] Changes to the build process or auxiliary tools and libraries such as documentation generation
• [ci] Changes to the continuous integration configuration
• [feat] A new feature
• [fix] A bug fix
• [perf] A code change that improves performance
• [refactor] A code change that neither fixes a bug nor adds a feature
• [revert] A change used to revert a previous commit
• [style] Changes that do not affect the meaning of the code (white-space, formatting, missing semi-colons, etc.)

Secondary type

• [docs] Documentation changes
• [test] Adding missing or correcting existing tests

Does this PR introduce a BREAKING CHANGE?

No.

Related issues and/or pull requests

None

Describe the changes you're proposing

Debian related distributions have depricated apt-key. This change implements the aptkey = False flag in newer versions of Ubuntu/Debian.
The repo is also cleared by setting the clean_file option to True

Pillar / config required to test the proposed changes

It's a fundamental change so any config will trigger it. Here's an example

powerdns:
config:
security-poll-suffix:
setgid: pdns
setuid: pdns
webserver-address: 0.0.0.0
webserver-allow-from: 10.0.0.0/8
webserver-port: 8083

Documentation checklist

• Updated the README (e.g. Available states).
• Updated pillar.example.

Testing checklist

• Included in Kitchen (i.e. under state_top).
• Covered by new/existing tests (e.g. InSpec, Serverspec, etc.).
• Updated the relevant test pillar.

Additional context

[waynegemmell]

I see there was an issue with the commit name. I've edited it. Not sure how to re-run the tests.

[waynegemmell]

@vveliev-tc I've done the update. Is that right?

[waynegemmell]

It would be nice to move all that logic to the yaml files but I'm not sure how much complexity they support.

[waynegemmell]

Anything else to be done to get this committed? @sticky-note ?

[sticky-note]

@waynegemmell Seems legit.

[sticky-note]

@waynegemmell Please rebase your commits and reword it to align with commitlint

[sticky-note]

Please rebase your commit and reword it/them to align with commitlint

[waynegemmell]

Updated. Hopefully that's ok now.

[sticky-note]

Thanks, just check few errors on commitlint job, please
https://github.com/saltstack-formulas/powerdns-formula/pull/25/checks?check_run_id=21221085532

[sticky-note]

Hi @waynegemmell, sorry for the delay:
Would you mind to fix this problems and rebase with master branch of this repo in order to be able to merge this PR please

⧗   input: fix(repo): Repo settings have been updated to handle key handling change.
✖   header must not be longer than 72 characters, current length is 73 [header-max-length]
✖   subject must not be sentence-case, start-case, pascal-case, upper-case [subject-case]
✖   subject may not end with full stop [subject-full-stop]

Thanks for your contribution btw

[waynegemmell]

Updated. Not sure why it's failing now. It doesn't look related to my code.

[sticky-note]

Thanks for your contribution 🥇
Sorry for the delay

[sticky-note]

@waynegemmell, We just released https://github.com/saltstack-formulas/powerdns-formula/releases/tag/v0.3.6.