Add controlplane upgrade e2e test using capi framework #845
Conversation
apedriza
force-pushed
the
add-capi-e2e-framework
branch
17 times, most recently
from
c81ecf9 to
39692b5
Compare
apedriza
changed the title
apedriza
force-pushed
the
add-capi-e2e-framework
branch
4 times, most recently
from
2ee12be to
117cc23
Compare
apedriza
force-pushed
the
add-capi-e2e-framework
branch
from
117cc23 to
2eb46c2
Compare
.golangci.yml
Outdated
| @@ -17,4 +17,4 @@ linters: | |||
| - gofmt # Checks whether code was gofmt-ed | |||
| - goheader # Checks is file headers matche a given pattern | |||
| - revive # Stricter drop-in replacement for golint | |||
| - ginkgolinter # Enforces standards of using ginkgo and gomega | |||
| - ginkgolinter # Enforces standards of using ginkgo and gomega | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Do we need ginkgolinter if we do not implement tests using Ginko?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
mm I don't know why this diff appears, at the beginning I added some linter-ignoring stuff when ginkgo was added but then I removed it after agree on remove ginkgo. Anyway ginkgolinter was added some time ago probably for this usage: https://github.com/k0sproject/k0smotron/blob/main/internal/controller/k0smotron.io/suite_test.go 👈 I think is scaffolded code from kubebuilder. Doesn't add any value so I think could be removed
Done in 016c67a
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is this a cluster definition for a single test scenario? If so, Maybe bit more descriptive name for the file and/or some comments in the file would be good.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
is a cluster predefined configuration template that can be used by more than one test scenario (using docker infra provider). It is what CAPI refers as "flavor". Another custer-template for some of our tests should be a definition using clusterclass for example. In this case this cluster-template flavor uses is called "OOC" because controlplane is Out-of-Cluster (k0scontrolplane). I can rename this template to cluster-template-k0scontrolplane maybe.
apedriza
force-pushed
the
add-capi-e2e-framework
branch
from
ae3a7fd to
6e9350c
Compare
|
@jnummelin thanks for the feedback! Comments addressed. Some of them accidentally lost but addressed too 9c9b3c0 |
apedriza
force-pushed
the
add-capi-e2e-framework
branch
from
4fb27ea to
9c418b4
Compare
Signed-off-by: Adrian Pedriza <adripedriza@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Adrian Pedriza <adripedriza@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Adrian Pedriza <adripedriza@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Adrian Pedriza <adripedriza@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Adrian Pedriza <adripedriza@gmail.com>
apedriza
force-pushed
the
add-capi-e2e-framework
branch
from
9c418b4 to
03ca44f
Compare
fix #775
This PR makes use of the e2e framework built by CAPI and used by several providers. This is intended to address current problems described in this issue such as code repetition or a proper collection of logs in case of failure. Also, this approach prepares the ground for testing using an agnostic infrastructure provider. By adopting this framework, much of the code required for each test (such as bootstrap management cluster setup) is imported from the CAPI framework. On the other hand, a log dump of all relevant test components logs + configuration used is implemented if the test fails, improving the debugging capability of the test in case of failure.
For now, a basic configuration is sufficient. The intention is to migrate the current CAPI smoke tests little by little from the current approach to the proposed one.