Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We鈥檒l occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

馃尡 e2e framework: introduce KcpConfigOption function #2197

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Oct 18, 2022

Conversation

p0lyn0mial
Copy link
Contributor

Summary

Allows for providing a custom configuration when creating a PrivateKcpServer. Could be extended in the future to SharedKcpServer

It will be used in #2132. The PrivateKcpServer will be created with WithScratchDirectories. The scratch directories will be shared with an instance of the cache server

Related issue(s)

part of #342

Allows for providing a custom configuration when creating a `PrivateKcpServer`.
Could be extended in the future to `SharedKcpServer`
cfg.DataDir = dataDir
return cfg
}
}
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

why isn't this the default to have independent artifact and data dirs?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The PrivateKcpServer was extended so that the scratch dirs can be provided externally by the test.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

if they are created already, is the problem that you cannot access them?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I wanted to create these files before starting my tests, so that the cache-server artifact, data are placed in the same location.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I cannot rely on the PrivateKcpServer method because it immediately starts the kcp server.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

and in a standalone mode the kcp requires a path to kubeconifig that holds config for the cache-server

@sttts
Copy link
Member

sttts commented Oct 18, 2022

/lgtm
/approve

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Oct 18, 2022
@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Oct 18, 2022

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: sttts

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 /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Oct 18, 2022
@p0lyn0mial
Copy link
Contributor Author

/retest

@openshift-merge-robot openshift-merge-robot merged commit 12bbb4c into kcp-dev:main Oct 18, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants