Skip to content

[WIP][AIRFLOW-3529] Simplify k8s executor testing process.#4326

Closed
dimberman wants to merge 14 commits intoapache:masterfrom
bloomberg:seperate-kube-testing
Closed

[WIP][AIRFLOW-3529] Simplify k8s executor testing process.#4326
dimberman wants to merge 14 commits intoapache:masterfrom
bloomberg:seperate-kube-testing

Conversation

@dimberman
Copy link
Contributor

Make sure you have checked all steps below.

Jira

  • My PR addresses the following Airflow Jira issues and references them in the PR title. For example, "[AIRFLOW-XXX] My Airflow PR"

Description

  • Here are some details about my PR, including screenshots of any UI changes:

Currently all integration testing for the kubernetes executor takes place on minikube. This is simultaneously a lot slower and not accurate to real-world use-cases. This PR will create a one-step script to run on a real k8s cluster and write documentation for easier onboarding.

Tests

  • My PR adds the following unit tests OR does not need testing for this extremely good reason:

Commits

  • My commits all reference Jira issues in their subject lines, and I have squashed multiple commits if they address the same issue. In addition, my commits follow the guidelines from "How to write a good git commit message":
    1. Subject is separated from body by a blank line
    2. Subject is limited to 50 characters (not including Jira issue reference)
    3. Subject does not end with a period
    4. Subject uses the imperative mood ("add", not "adding")
    5. Body wraps at 72 characters
    6. Body explains "what" and "why", not "how"

Documentation

  • In case of new functionality, my PR adds documentation that describes how to use it.
    • When adding new operators/hooks/sensors, the autoclass documentation generation needs to be added.
    • All the public functions and the classes in the PR contain docstrings that explain what it does

Code Quality

  • Passes flake8

@odracci
Copy link
Contributor

odracci commented Dec 16, 2018

@dimberman would it make sense if you use #3770 as a base branch for this PR? In my PR I've already fixed git-sync and many other issues in the build. WDYT?

@dimberman dimberman closed this Apr 30, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants