chore(stoneintg-1092): refactor group snapshots tests #1504
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 |
jencull
force-pushed
the
stoneintg-1092
branch
from
09c0f1a to
797299d
Compare
jencull
force-pushed
the
stoneintg-1092
branch
from
797299d to
b31841d
Compare
|
Changes look fine in general, let see if the CI passes. |
|
I think once you change the commit message from chore(stoneintg-1092) to chore(stoneintg-1092): conventional commit check will pass. |
Yep, have changed it but its not showing in the title. Will come back to it. This is a WIP, I am just testing this before i start merging additional code from the status-reporting file. Will then test those changes and, finally, update the readme. So its marked as a WIP for now as I work my way through the stages. |
jencull
force-pushed
the
stoneintg-1092
branch
from
b31841d to
e52a57a
Compare
jencull
changed the title
jencull
force-pushed
the
stoneintg-1092
branch
from
e52a57a to
d90a4bf
Compare
jencull
force-pushed
the
stoneintg-1092
branch
from
d90a4bf to
c096a80
Compare
|
/retest |
jencull
force-pushed
the
stoneintg-1092
branch
from
c096a80 to
3fe8830
Compare
|
/retest |
jencull
force-pushed
the
stoneintg-1092
branch
from
3fe8830 to
1917b04
Compare
hongweiliu17
requested review from
hongweiliu17,
14rcole,
dirgim,
kasemAlem and
dheerajodha
jencull
force-pushed
the
stoneintg-1092
branch
3 times, most recently
from
33dab36 to
454d654
Compare
|
/retest |
1 similar comment
|
/retest |
jencull
force-pushed
the
stoneintg-1092
branch
2 times, most recently
from
f958a9f to
2fbb497
Compare
|
/retest |
jencull
force-pushed
the
stoneintg-1092
branch
3 times, most recently
from
1534b0b to
77324c5
Compare
Signed-off-by: jcullina <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: jcullina <[email protected]>
This reverts commit c8fe8b3.
|
/retest |
Signed-off-by: jcullina <[email protected]>
|
@jencull: The following test has Failed, say /retest to rerun failed tests.
Inspecting Test ArtifactsTo inspect your test artifacts, follow these steps:
mkdir -p oras-artifacts
cd oras-artifacts
oras pull quay.io/konflux-test-storage/konflux-team/e2e-tests:konflux-e2e-5k84zTest results analysis🚨 Failed to provision a cluster, see the log for more details: Click to view logsINFO: Log in to your Red Hat account... INFO: Configure AWS Credentials... WARN: The current version (1.2.50) is not up to date with latest rosa cli released version (1.2.52). WARN: It is recommended that you update to the latest version. INFO: Logged in as 'konflux-ci-418295695583' on 'https://api.openshift.com' INFO: Create ROSA with HCP cluster... WARN: The current version (1.2.50) is not up to date with latest rosa cli released version (1.2.52). WARN: It is recommended that you update to the latest version. time=2025-04-04T11:47:49Z level=info msg=Ignored check for policy key 'sts_hcp_ec2_registry_permission_policy' (zero egress feature toggle is not enabled) INFO: Creating cluster 'kx-76733e3559' INFO: To view a list of clusters and their status, run 'rosa list clusters' INFO: Cluster 'kx-76733e3559' has been created. INFO: Once the cluster is installed you will need to add an Identity Provider before you can login into the cluster. See 'rosa create idp --help' for more information.
Nodes:
INFO: Preparing to create operator roles. |
| It("should make changes to the multiple-repo", func() { | ||
| // Use mergeMultiResultSha for multi-repo (latest merged PR SHA for multi-repo) | ||
| err = f.AsKubeAdmin.CommonController.Github.CreateRef( | ||
| componentRepoNameForGeneralIntegration, multiComponentDefaultBranch, mergeMultiResultSha, multiComponentPRBranchName) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
mergeMultiResultSha isn't initialized anymore.
| if !CurrentSpecReport().Failed() { | ||
| cleanup(*f, testNamespace, applicationName, componentA.Name, snapshot) | ||
| cleanup(*f, testNamespace, applicationName, componentNames[0], snapshot) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
should we do cleanup for all 3 components?
| // Delete all the pipelineruns in the namespace before sending PR | ||
| //Expect(f.AsKubeAdmin.TektonController.DeleteAllPipelineRunsInASpecificNamespace(testNamespace)).To(Succeed()) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What do we think about uncommenting this? This would delete all PLRs and give us a clean slate to do the next phase of testing, where we interact with group snapshot. Needs to be tested locally first.
| }, timeout, constants.PipelineRunPollingInterval).Should(Succeed(), fmt.Sprintf("Timed out waiting for Integration PipelineRun to start for %s/%s", testNamespace, componentName)) | ||
| }) | ||
|
|
||
| It(fmt.Sprintf("should merge the init PaC PR successfully for %s", componentName), func() { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Optional: To save resources, we can cancel the "push"-based build PLR generated after merging the "init PaC" PRs. The test currently generates 5+ of those on each run.
| Expect(f.AsKubeAdmin.CommonController.Github.GetCheckRunConclusion(expectedCheckRunName, multiComponentRepoNameForGroupSnapshot, prHeadSha, prNumber)).To(Equal(constants.CheckrunConclusionSuccess)) | ||
| }) | ||
| When("creating and testing multiple components", func() { | ||
| for _, contextDir := range multiComponentContextDirs { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
multiComponentContextDirs holds the names of 2 components from the multi-component repo. Is it intentional to skip the creation of the (3rd) monorepo component?
|
|
||
| //Create the ref, add the files and create the PR - monorepo | ||
| err = f.AsKubeAdmin.CommonController.Github.CreateRef(multiComponentRepoNameForGroupSnapshot, multiComponentDefaultBranch, mergeResultSha, multiComponentPRBranchName) | ||
| It("makes sure that the group snapshot contains the last build PipelineRun for each component", func() { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It would be worth having another When block after this one, where we check for the presence and status of Checkruns of Integration tests, especially the PR group integration test -- for context, presence of it would catch this bug in future: STONEINTG-1174
Description
Please include a summary of the changes and the related issue. Please also include relevant motivation and context. List any dependencies that are required for this change.
Issue ticket number and link
Type of change
How Has This Been Tested?
Please describe the tests that you ran to verify your changes. Provide instructions so we can reproduce. Please also list any relevant details for your test configuration
Checklist: