Skip kube-up related GCE tests when running e2e tests on kops #120628
Conversation
k8s-ci-robot
added
release-note-none
|
This issue is currently awaiting triage. If a SIG or subproject determines this is a relevant issue, they will accept it by applying the The 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/test-infra repository. |
k8s-ci-robot
added
the
needs-priority
k8s-ci-robot
added
area/e2e-test-framework
|
/assign @BenTheElder @michelle192837 |
|
/kind cleanup |
k8s-ci-robot
added
kind/cleanup
upodroid
force-pushed
the
skip-kube-up-tests
branch
from
b2341b5
to
65e8871
Compare
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: upodroid The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.
Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
|
/retest |
|
/retest |
|
/hold we don't want to make the e2e test framework smart, and the goal is to remove all these cloud provider skips from the framework not add more ... the jobs should use the regex to skip tests, Patrick also had a kep to improve this mechanism using ginkgo tags |
k8s-ci-robot
added
the
do-not-merge/hold
|
@upodroid you definitely have to write a KEP under sig-testing if you plan to touch on kubernetes code base and making impactful changes on jobs and behaviors, so the SIGs can evaluate and be aware of the changes https://github.com/kubernetes/enhancements/tree/master/keps/sig-testing |
|
I agree, |
|
/retest As we discussed yesterday, I'm writing a doc that will form the KEP for this project. In the meanwhile, can we remove the tests in |
|
/test pull-kubernetes-e2e-gce-cos-kubetest2 |
|
@upodroid: 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/test-infra repository. I understand the commands that are listed here. |
| @@ -398,7 +398,7 @@ func RegisterClusterFlags(flags *flag.FlagSet) { | |||
| // If this becomes true as well, they should be refactored into RegisterCommonFlags. | |||
| flags.BoolVar(&TestContext.PrepullImages, "prepull-images", false, "If true, prepull images so image pull failures do not cause test failures.") | |||
| flags.StringVar(&TestContext.Provider, "provider", "", "The name of the Kubernetes provider (gce, gke, local, skeleton (the fallback if not set), etc.)") | |||
| flags.StringVar(&TestContext.Tooling, "tooling", "", "The tooling in use (kops, gke, etc.)") | |||
| flags.StringVar(&TestContext.Tooling, "tooling", "kube-up", "The tooling used to create the cluster (kops, gke, kube-up).") | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This PR is being closed out. I needed to check something in the kubetest2 test.
/close
|
@upodroid: Closed this PR. In response to this:
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/test-infra repository. |
What type of PR is this?
What this PR does / why we need it:
I'm migrating away from kube-up clusters to kops clusters for k/k e2e testing. Some of our e2e tests are written to test functionality that is only present in kube-up so those tests now only run on kube-up clusters.
Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
Part of kubernetes/test-infra#30686
Special notes for your reviewer:
Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?
Additional documentation e.g., KEPs (Kubernetes Enhancement Proposals), usage docs, etc.: