Add documentation for KUDO integration tests and move into test/integration. #490
Conversation
pkg/test/case_test.go
Outdated
| @@ -20,7 +20,7 @@ func TestLoadTestSteps(t *testing.T) { | |||
| testSteps []Step | |||
| }{ | |||
| { | |||
| "test_data/with-overrides/", | |||
| "../../test/integration/with-overrides/", | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I strongly support moving testing to the test folder from root. This is my least favorite part of it. "../../test". so every test we will need to know how deep we are in the package structure and every time we refactor packages we will need to deal with this? It seems easy for a human to fat finger. Is there anything we can think of to solve this in a better way?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is just one or two cases that exercise various parts of the test suite.
So, two ideas:
- We leave it with the
../../test/integration/with-overrides/. This would only really break if someone changed thewith-overridestest for some reason. - We leave the tests that
case_test.goinspects inpkg/test/test_datasince they are literally that, just test data.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think I'll go with option two. Especially since they aren't testing KUDO, just the harness.
| @@ -15,10 +15,12 @@ import ( | |||
| // If testToRun is set to a non-empty string, it is passed as a `-run` argument to the go test harness. | |||
| func RunTests(testName string, testToRun string, testFunc func(*testing.T)) { | |||
| // Set the verbose test flag to true since we are not using the regular go test CLI. | |||
| flag.Lookup("test.v").Value.Set("true") | |||
| flag.Set("test.v", "true") | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I just noticed when I opened the docs that they had a helper method for it already, so cleaned it up
What type of PR is this?
/kind cleanup
/kind documentation
What this PR does / why we need it:
Moves the integration tests into
test/integrationand improves the documentation.Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
Fixes #469
Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?: