[KOGITO-8961][KSW-Operator] Split use case and test examples #139
Conversation
desmax74
force-pushed
the
kogito-8961
branch
2 times, most recently
from
b88f893
to
84489e3
Compare
| @@ -31,11 +31,12 @@ import ( | |||
|
|
|||
| func TestKogitoServerlessBuildController(t *testing.T) { | |||
| namespace := t.Name() | |||
| ksw := test.GetKogitoServerlessWorkflow("../config/samples/"+test.KogitoServerlessWorkflowSampleYamlCR, namespace) | |||
| ksw := test.GetBaseServerlessWorkflowNoPackage(namespace) | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We have some test that needs as a path "../config/samples/" to load the yaml's files, others "../../config/samples/" because they are inside a package
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think we should use a smarter way of doing that. Maybe we can infer the path we are and compose it dynamically. If you think it is worth a shot, it would be a great improvement. I wouldn't do it if it takes too much time.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@ricardozanini is it ok for your this https://github.com/kiegroup/kogito-serverless-operator/pull/139/files#diff-8affcd5838f425d5db07c12738684112559a18621ec539e9b33986abe804db7fR124-R132 in conjunction with the runtime.Caller ? No other ideas to decide the path, but I'm open if you have better
There was a problem hiding this comment.
See my comment here: https://github.com/kiegroup/kogito-serverless-operator/pull/139#discussion_r1213170430
😆
desmax74
force-pushed
the
kogito-8961
branch
6 times, most recently
from
0e2d838
to
91f326f
Compare
| @@ -1,10 +0,0 @@ | |||
| apiVersion: sw.kogito.kie.org/v1alpha08 | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
didn't we discuss the we wouldn't change the config/samples?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We have agreed the proposal of @davidesalerno to use the needed yaml files and create the structs with the few fields needed in the tests instead to have one yaml file for each test, this file is replaced by the platform plus the field with the base image
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The config/samples directory is used by the OLM/Operator SDK to compose the CSV. Meaning that users will see these examples on the OpenShift console.
Bear that in mind and keep only the simplest ones. I think this is the proposal, right?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
So we should keep here only the ones that will be in the CSV, one very simple example per custom resource.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
For example, see here: https://operatorhub.io/operator/nexus-operator-m88i
Click on "View Example".
That's the purpose of this directory.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@ricardozanini Yep the file used by kustomization
https://github.com/kiegroup/kogito-serverless-operator/blob/main/config/samples/kustomization.yaml
are only:
sw.kogito_v1alpha08_kogitoserverlessworkflow.yaml
sw.kogito_v1alpha08_kogitoserverlessplatform.yaml
and in the folder in the PR we leave only these two and sw.kogito_v1alpha08_kogitoserverlessworkflow_devmodeWithConfigMapAndExternalResource.yaml with a complete example, but we can move it in the docs folder
| func GetPathForSamples(path string) string { | ||
| operatorPath := strings.Split(path, "kogito-serverless-operator")[1] | ||
| packages := strings.Count(operatorPath, "/") | ||
| if strings.Contains(operatorPath, "/test/") || packages == 3 { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Not required, we can do it later. But maybe the filepath package might help here? https://gobyexample.com/file-paths
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We do later, is a func used only in test
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Sorry to say this just now, but reading your comment here https://github.com/kiegroup/kogito-serverless-operator/pull/143#discussion_r1213619180 made me realize that we should move the resources to testdata instead of tests, so it won't be considered a go package by go tooling.
- Keep in
config/samplesthe excerpt for the CSV as we discussed earlier - Use
testdatainstead oftestsfor the unit tests within the project
desmax74
force-pushed
the
kogito-8961
branch
2 times, most recently
from
307dc37
to
632740a
Compare
desmax74
force-pushed
the
kogito-8961
branch
2 times, most recently
from
cbf8e6e
to
18ce8a8
Compare
desmax74
force-pushed
the
kogito-8961
branch
4 times, most recently
from
2b1b589
to
0c2053c
Compare
Signed-off-by: desmax74 <mdessi@redhat.com>
See:https://issues.redhat.com/browse/KOGITO-8961
Description of the change:
Motivation for the change:
Checklist
How to backport a pull request to a different branch?
In order to automatically create a backporting pull request please add one or more labels having the following format
backport-<branch-name>, where<branch-name>is the name of the branch where the pull request must be backported to (e.g.,backport-7.67.xto backport the original PR to the7.67.xbranch).Once the original pull request is successfully merged, the automated action will create one backporting pull request per each label (with the previous format) that has been added.
If something goes wrong, the author will be notified and at this point a manual backporting is needed.