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’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Flake 26210: decouple explicit access from port 80 #26961

Merged

Conversation

sttts
Copy link
Contributor

@sttts sttts commented Jun 7, 2016

Flake #26210 only happens for port 80. To decouple the possible causes, all
tests with explicit port 80 are moved to port 1080 (these were 80% of the flakes).
The urls without a specified port (which map to port 80 though) are left untouched.

If port 1080 does not show up as flake now, there is really a connection to the
actual port number.

Flake kubernetes#26210 only happens for port 80. To decouple the possible causes, all
tests with explicit port 80 are moved to port 1080 (these were 80% of the flakes).
The urls without a specified port (which map to port 80 though) are left untouched.

If port 1080 does not show up as flake now, there is really a connection to the
actual port number.
@sttts sttts added area/test priority/critical-urgent Highest priority. Must be actively worked on as someone's top priority right now. area/provider/gcp Issues or PRs related to gcp provider labels Jun 7, 2016
@sttts sttts added this to the v1.3 milestone Jun 7, 2016
@sttts sttts changed the title Decouple explicit access from port 80 Flake 26210: decouple explicit access from port 80 Jun 7, 2016
@k8s-github-robot k8s-github-robot added size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files. release-note-label-needed labels Jun 7, 2016
@sttts
Copy link
Contributor Author

sttts commented Jun 7, 2016

@k8s-bot test this issue: #23545

@sttts sttts added release-note-none Denotes a PR that doesn't merit a release note. and removed release-note-label-needed labels Jun 7, 2016
@sttts
Copy link
Contributor Author

sttts commented Jun 7, 2016

@k8s-bot node test this issue: #26431

@sttts
Copy link
Contributor Author

sttts commented Jun 7, 2016

@k8s-bot test this issue: #26431

@k8s-bot
Copy link

k8s-bot commented Jun 7, 2016

GCE e2e build/test passed for commit 17e6797.

@krousey krousey added the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Jun 8, 2016
@krousey krousey self-assigned this Jun 8, 2016
@k8s-github-robot
Copy link

@k8s-bot test this [submit-queue is verifying that this PR is safe to merge]

@k8s-bot
Copy link

k8s-bot commented Jun 8, 2016

GCE e2e build/test passed for commit 17e6797.

@k8s-github-robot
Copy link

Automatic merge from submit-queue

@k8s-github-robot k8s-github-robot merged commit 3d332a0 into kubernetes:master Jun 8, 2016
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
area/provider/gcp Issues or PRs related to gcp provider area/test lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. priority/critical-urgent Highest priority. Must be actively worked on as someone's top priority right now. release-note-none Denotes a PR that doesn't merit a release note. size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

6 participants