Add Unit Tests for TestMissingResultWhenStepErrorIsIgnored and Update e2e test: TestFailingStepOnContinue #6771
Conversation
|
@EmmaMunley: The label(s) 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. |
|
The following is the coverage report on the affected files.
|
|
The following is the coverage report on the affected files.
|
|
Opened issue here for flakey test: #6772 |
|
@EmmaMunley: The
The following commands are available to trigger optional jobs:
Use 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. |
|
/retest |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
thanks Emma!
I was thinking about whether it would make sense for this unit test to replace the corresponding integration test. I think it probably can't, since the integration test also verifies the behavior of the taskrun on error. However (not necessarily in scope for this PR) we could trim down the integration test to test only the taskrun behavior, since IMO the pipelineRun behavior is adequately tested by this unit test. That would make the test suite just a tiny bit faster and less flaky. thoughts?
da5127e to
b85e4ef
Compare
|
The following is the coverage report on the affected files.
|
|
The following is the coverage report on the affected files.
|
| kind: TaskRun | ||
| name: test-pipeline-missing-results-task1 | ||
| pipelineTaskName: task1 | ||
| provenance: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The provenance field looks like irrelevant of this test and maybe we could consider ignoring the comparison for it. But it is totally optional 😃
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@QuanZhang-William I'm not sure if we have an ignoreProvenance field. It looks like the provenance field was introduced in this PR: #6495 and added to all of the expectedPR statuses. Maybe for consistency we leave as is and then can scope to a separate PR if we want to add an ignoreProvenance field?
b85e4ef to
59557e4
Compare
59557e4 to
130a958
Compare
|
The following is the coverage report on the affected files.
|
|
The following is the coverage report on the affected files.
|
|
The following is the coverage report on the affected files.
|
130a958 to
ed7c2bc
Compare
|
The following is the coverage report on the affected files.
|
|
/test pull-tekton-pipeline-go-coverage-df |
|
@EmmaMunley: The specified target(s) for
The following commands are available to trigger optional jobs:
Use 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. |
|
/test pull-tekton-pipeline-go-coverage |
|
The following is the coverage report on the affected files.
|
|
The following is the coverage report on the affected files.
|
|
The following is the coverage report on the affected files.
|
ed7c2bc to
c2af18a
Compare
|
The following is the coverage report on the affected files.
|
|
The following is the coverage report on the affected files.
|
c2af18a to
b6e4d4c
Compare
|
The following is the coverage report on the affected files.
|
|
The following is the coverage report on the affected files.
|
b6e4d4c to
c46b69f
Compare
|
The following is the coverage report on the affected files.
|
|
The following is the coverage report on the affected files.
|
|
/retest Chaingaurd registry was down https://status.cgr.dev/ |
… e2e test: TestFailingStepOnContinue This commit adds test coverage for a pipelinerun that has 2 tasks where the first task produces 2 results that are consumed in the 2nd task. However, the first task contains a failing step so only 1 of the 2 results are produced which results in a failing pipeline run. Prior to this commit, this was an E2E integration test, but missing unit test coverage. This increases the test coverage and also modifies the e2e test to only test the behavior of the TaskRun, since the PipelineRun behavior is now being tested in unit tests to reduce redundancies, improve speed, and reduce flakes.
c46b69f to
68ffd1a
Compare
|
The following is the coverage report on the affected files.
|
|
The following is the coverage report on the affected files.
|
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: lbernick 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 |
|
/lgtm |
Changes
This PR adds test coverage for a pipelinerun that has 2 tasks where the first task produces 2 results that are consumed in the 2nd task. However, the first task contains a failing step so only 1 of the 2 results are produced which results in a failing pipeline run.
Prior to this PR, this was an E2E integration test, but missing unit test coverage. This increases the test coverage and also modifies the e2e test to only test the behavior of the TaskRun, since the PipelineRun behavior is now being tested in unit tests to reduce redundancies, improve speed, and reduce flakes.
/kind bug
Submitter Checklist
As the author of this PR, please check off the items in this checklist:
/kind <type>. Valid types are bug, cleanup, design, documentation, feature, flake, misc, question, tepRelease Notes