🐛 Use tenancy as filter in ownerReference test #7976
Conversation
8125147 to
3ed7743
Compare
|
/lgtm Nice catch @fabriziopandini |
|
LGTM label has been added. Git tree hash: 9a572afc5a2218ad71f1b2908186d7e0fe4b6943
|
| continue | ||
| } | ||
| // If the node is not a tenant do not add it to the ownerGraph. | ||
| if len(v.tenant) == 0 { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think we can use graph.getMoveNodes to get the list of nodes already filtered with this criteria (so we can drop also this if)
In a future iteration, if necessary, we can also be explicit about which tenant we care about (one cluster, one clusterclass, probably one CRS), but for now it is ok to consider everything that should be moved because that's what is relevant in the test.
3ed7743 to
2663eba
Compare
|
LGTM label has been added. Git tree hash: 1603c5ba2e92987d7e112e2433a967aeb1e24ff8
|
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: fabriziopandini 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 |
|
/retest I think we need to re-run the netlify tests. |
|
Kicked off a re-run from the GitHub UI 🤔 not sure if that did it though |
|
@killianmuldoon might have to rebase/force-push to re-trigger netlify |
|
Yup had the same on a different PR. Maybe it's this issue: https://answers.netlify.com/t/clear-cache-and-retry-for-deploy-preview-does-not-update-pull-request/81755 Didn't have any success with retries otherwise. |
2663eba to
dd50972
Compare
This change cleans up the implementation introduced in #7973 using the tenancy concept exposed in the objectGraph returned by the call to discovery.