[WIP] feat: Refactor conformance suite to reuse test file for mesh and gw tests #4295
Conversation
k8s-ci-robot
added
do-not-merge/work-in-progress
k8s-ci-robot
added
the
kind/cleanup
k8s-ci-robot
added
area/conformance-machinery
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: LiorLieberman The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. The pull request process is described here
Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
k8s-ci-robot
added
approved
|
maybe now it will work /cc @howardjohn |
|
also |
|
@LiorLieberman: The following test failed, say
Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard. Please help us cut down on flakes by linking to an open issue when you hit one in your PR. Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository. I understand the commands that are listed here. |
howardjohn
left a comment
howardjohn
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Overall looks like a good direction. I think investment into helper functions to avoid (where possible) the need for test authors to care (as much?) about gtw vs mesh will be helpful but tricky
| t.Run(tc.GetTestCaseName(i), func(t *testing.T) { | ||
| t.Parallel() | ||
| http.MakeRequestAndExpectEventuallyConsistentResponse(t, suite.RoundTripper, suite.TimeoutConfig, gwAddr, tc) | ||
| if !s.CurrentTest.IsMesh { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
nit: a helper around calling the gtw vs the mesh pod would be helpful to avoid needing this if on each case
3 participants
What type of PR is this?
/kind cleanup
/area conformance-machinery
/cc @howardjohn
for initial feedback on the overall approach.
(I know we can refactor further and try to reuse same yaml files with Namespace, backends, and parentRef substitutes, but I think maintaining separate yamls are much simpler. )
/cc @mikemorris @youngnick @kflynn @bexxmodd
What this PR does / why we need it:
draft refactor of conformance suite to reuse test file for mesh and gw tests
Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
Ref: #3729 (comment)
Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?: