test : add table-driven tests for PullSecrets with edge case coverage #1506
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
+ Added table-driven tests for the PullSecrets function + Used fake Kubernetes client and runtime scheme setup for isolated testing Signed-off-by: Rohan Kumar <rohaan@redhat.com>
rohanKanojia
requested review from
akurinnoy,
dkwon17 and
ibuziuk
as code owners
22 tasks
akurinnoy
approved these changes
Sep 23, 2025
dkwon17
approved these changes
Sep 30, 2025
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: akurinnoy, dkwon17, rohanKanojia 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 |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What does this PR do?
Extracted from #1504
Moved this test to a separate PR as it doesn't relate to changes in #1504 .
In response to #1504 (comment) , I just wanted to check if we will be getting the same failures as the che-operator is getting due to the controller-runtime upgrade by writing a unit test for
Listoperator using fake client.Note: It turns out that che-operator logic depended on the presence of TypeMeta, which was causing problems.
What issues does this PR fix or reference?
N/A
Is it tested? How?
Changes include only a unit test, build passing should verify it's working as expected.
PR Checklist
/test v8-devworkspace-operator-e2e, v8-che-happy-pathto trigger)v8-devworkspace-operator-e2e: DevWorkspace e2e testv8-che-happy-path: Happy path for verification integration with Che