-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 290
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
[Draft] Group docker simple flow tests to suite #8393
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.
Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
6c98737
to
ea5a726
Compare
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #8393 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 73.48% 73.48%
=======================================
Files 578 578
Lines 36489 36489
=======================================
Hits 26814 26814
Misses 7956 7956
Partials 1719 1719 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
@@ -1480,3 +1434,16 @@ func TestDockerKubernetes130KubeletConfigurationSimpleFlow(t *testing.T) { | |||
) | |||
runKubeletConfigurationFlow(test) | |||
} | |||
|
|||
func TestDockerKubernetesSimpleFlowSuite(t *testing.T) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I want to see a mock of this method that handles all OSs and Providers, you dont have to make it work out of the gate, but Id like to see it so we can iterate on the design here before rolling this out.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Guillermo has made one showing how the suite handles OSs and Providers: https://github.com/aws/eks-anywhere/compare/main...g-gaston:eks-anywhere:poc-multi-test?expand=1
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I have a gut feeling, parameterizing provider could make the e2e test harder to write and maintain, which should be as simple as a test yaml file + "eksa create cluster". I am OK with parameterize OS though
Issue #, if available:
Description of changes:
Testing (if applicable): Manually invoked the quick-e2e-tests with this code change
Documentation added/planned (if applicable):
By submitting this pull request, I confirm that you can use, modify, copy, and redistribute this contribution, under the terms of your choice.