added crinit aggregated test #170

onyiny-ang · 2018-01-09T14:17:39Z

Adds crinit aggregated unit tests similar to standalone_test.go. Follow up PR will attempt to refactor for common unit test for standalone and aggregated.
Addresses issue: #114

/sig multicluster
/cc @perotinus @font

font · 2018-01-09T16:41:19Z

/ok-to-test

perotinus

Really cool to see this taking shape!

perotinus · 2018-01-10T01:01:47Z

pkg/crinit/aggregated/aggregated_test.go

@@ -0,0 +1,515 @@
+/*
+Copyright 2017 The Kubernetes Authors.


perotinus · 2018-01-10T01:03:35Z

pkg/crinit/aggregated/aggregated_test.go

+	}
+}
+
+func TestMarshalOptions(t *testing.T) {


Is the intention to migrate this to a shared test later? MarshalOptions isn't in this package.

perotinus · 2018-01-10T01:04:55Z

pkg/crinit/aggregated/aggregated_test.go

+	"k8s.io/cluster-registry/pkg/crinit/util"
+)
+
+func TestValidateOptions(t *testing.T) {


Are these tests specific to the aggregated command? It seems like it would make sense to add only tests for the aggregated part here, since the standalone test is already testing these things and you're intending to refactor it in a follow-up.

perotinus · 2018-01-10T01:06:51Z

pkg/crinit/aggregated/aggregated_test.go

+	}
+}
+
+func TestCreateNamespace(t *testing.T) {


Same here: this is already being tested in the standalone tests. It feels to me like a cleaner path towards the final goal is to add a few tests for the aggregated-specific functionality, refactor the standlone tests into common, and then flesh out the tests for aggregated and standalone specific features.

That makes sense. I wanted to get something simple up for a start to get some ideas. I'm going to apply the [WIP] tag and work on making RBAC and APIService tests for aggregated first.

That makes total sense to me. Looking forward to seeing the tests that you come up with!

perotinus · 2018-01-16T19:43:01Z

@onyiny-ang Is this still WIP, or are you ready for a review?

onyiny-ang · 2018-01-16T19:56:07Z

@perotinus it's just about ready. I'm refactoring what I have to reduce code duplication and then will reset the commits to separate the manual changes from the dep/test changes as noted in the docs.

onyiny-ang · 2018-01-17T01:52:04Z

@perotinus @font This is ready for review

perotinus

Nice work! Great to see these tests coming together!

perotinus · 2018-01-18T01:56:51Z

pkg/crinit/aggregated/aggregated_test.go

+func TestCreateRBACObjects(t *testing.T) {
+	testCases := []struct {
+		desc        string
+		buffer      *bytes.Buffer


I don't think you need this in the test setup struct: it's the same in each test, so it can probably just live in the test.

IMO the things that should be here are the things that vary between tests and/or are relevant/interesting for someone trying to understand the tests.

Yep. That makes sense to me.

perotinus · 2018-01-22T23:46:21Z

pkg/crinit/aggregated/aggregated_test.go

+			if err != nil {
+				t.Error("Failed to create an RBAC Object")
+			}
+			chkrbac, _ := tc.client.CoreV1().ServiceAccounts(tc.opts.ClusterRegistryNamespace).Get(rbacObj.Name, metav1.GetOptions{})


I think this test will need to be extended in a later PR to validate the contents of the returned object, and the other objects being created as well: this method creates several resources, and we want to make sure that the created objects match our expectations as to what they will contain.

perotinus · 2018-01-22T23:46:49Z

pkg/crinit/aggregated/aggregated_test.go

+			if err != nil {
+				t.Error("Failed to create an RBAC Object")
+			}
+			chkrbac, _ := tc.client.CoreV1().ServiceAccounts(tc.opts.ClusterRegistryNamespace).Get(rbacObj.Name, metav1.GetOptions{})


createdRBACObj, _ := ...

?

perotinus · 2018-01-22T23:49:12Z

pkg/crinit/aggregated/aggregated_test.go

+			if err != nil {
+				t.Error("Error in pre-test generating credentials: %v", err)
+			}
+			apisvcObj, err := createAPIService(tc.buffer, tc.apisvcClient, tc.opts, util.GetCAKeyPair(credentials).Cert)


It might make this test a bit more robust if you create these dependencies in the test code, rather than relying on crinit's code to create the service and the credentials.

perotinus · 2018-01-22T23:49:57Z

pkg/crinit/aggregated/aggregated_test.go

+			}
+			apiService, _ := tc.apisvcClient.ApiregistrationV1beta1().APIServices().Get(apisvcObj.Name, metav1.GetOptions{})
+			if tc.svcExpected {
+				if apiService == nil {


I think it would be valuable to test for the contents of the object as well. We expect that they should match what's being provided in the inputs.

onyiny-ang · 2018-01-23T17:26:55Z

/test pull-cluster-registry-verify-bazel

perotinus

Thanks for the updates! A few more comments, but I think this is about ready to go in.

perotinus · 2018-01-24T02:34:22Z

pkg/crinit/aggregated/aggregated_test.go

+					t.Errorf("Error in creating API service")
+				} else {
+					if apiService.ObjectMeta.Name != apiSvcName {
+						t.Errorf("Unexpected API Service Created. Expected %v, got %v", apiSvcName, apiService.ObjectMeta.Name)


nit: Unexpected APIService created.

I'm not sure which nit you are indicating. Is it that APIService should have no space? Or that I should remove the following sentence (Expected. . .)? Or that the subsequent error messages have left out Service? I have assumed the latter but am not sure if this what you meant. In any case, that needed to be corrected.

Yes, it was that the following error messages left out Service. Apologies, I should have made the comment on one of those.

perotinus · 2018-01-24T02:34:42Z

pkg/crinit/aggregated/aggregated_test.go

+	for _, tc := range testCases {
+		t.Run(tc.desc, func(t *testing.T) {
+			buffer := &bytes.Buffer{}
+			//ips := []string{"1.2.3.4"}


Can you remove this commented-out line?

perotinus · 2018-01-24T02:35:44Z

Gopkg.lock

@@ -15,7 +15,12 @@

 [[projects]]
  name = "github.com/Azure/go-autorest"
-  packages = ["autorest","autorest/adal","autorest/azure","autorest/date"]
+  packages = [


What version of dep are you using? I'm not sure why your packages items are split by newlines. It's not a big deal, but it makes this diff a little harder to parse.

I noticed that. I was using the devel version but should be using the right version now.

But it still formats the Gopkg.lock differently. . .

dep version dep: version : v0.3.2 build date : 2017-10-19 git hash : 8ddfc8a go version : go1.9 go compiler : gc platform : linux/amd64

Please let me know if anything looks suspicious

perotinus · 2018-01-24T02:37:14Z

pkg/crinit/aggregated/aggregated_test.go

+		objExpected bool
+	}{
+		{
+			desc: "should create RBAC options",


nit: s/options/object

perotinus · 2018-01-24T02:37:53Z

pkg/crinit/aggregated/aggregated_test.go

+			svcExpected: true,
+		},
+		{
+			desc: "should create an API Service",


"should not create an API Service in dry-run mode"

or something similar, perhaps like you have in the RBAC test.

perotinus · 2018-01-24T18:41:26Z

/lgtm

Thanks for all your work on this!

k8s-ci-robot · 2018-01-24T18:41:31Z

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: onyiny-ang, perotinus

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

Needs approval from an approver in each of these OWNERS Files:

~~OWNERS~~ [perotinus]

You can indicate your approval by writing /approve in a comment
You can cancel your approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

k8s-ci-robot requested review from font and perotinus January 9, 2018 14:17

k8s-ci-robot removed the needs-ok-to-test Indicates a PR that requires an org member to verify it is safe to test. label Jan 9, 2018

perotinus reviewed Jan 10, 2018

View reviewed changes

onyiny-ang changed the title ~~added crinit aggregated test~~ [WIP]added crinit aggregated test Jan 11, 2018

k8s-ci-robot added the do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. label Jan 11, 2018

onyiny-ang force-pushed the master branch from bf66609 to c09ce37 Compare January 12, 2018 20:08

k8s-ci-robot added size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files. and removed size/XL Denotes a PR that changes 500-999 lines, ignoring generated files. labels Jan 12, 2018

onyiny-ang force-pushed the master branch from c09ce37 to e3e2a82 Compare January 12, 2018 22:57

k8s-ci-robot added size/XXL Denotes a PR that changes 1000+ lines, ignoring generated files. and removed size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files. labels Jan 12, 2018

onyiny-ang force-pushed the master branch 7 times, most recently from ce36852 to 4facace Compare January 16, 2018 18:15

onyiny-ang force-pushed the master branch from 4ea36ad to 8d0387e Compare January 16, 2018 22:47

onyiny-ang changed the title ~~[WIP]added crinit aggregated test~~ added crinit aggregated test Jan 16, 2018

k8s-ci-robot removed the do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. label Jan 16, 2018

perotinus reviewed Jan 22, 2018

View reviewed changes

onyiny-ang force-pushed the master branch 3 times, most recently from 83bd457 to bfb46c5 Compare January 23, 2018 22:35

perotinus reviewed Jan 24, 2018

View reviewed changes

onyiny-ang added 2 commits January 24, 2018 09:39

added RBAC and API Service aggregated tests to crinit

9ba6292

automated build and vendor files associated with changes

f59581f

onyiny-ang force-pushed the master branch from 6e8d836 to f59581f Compare January 24, 2018 14:55

k8s-ci-robot assigned perotinus Jan 24, 2018

k8s-ci-robot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Jan 24, 2018

k8s-ci-robot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Jan 24, 2018

k8s-ci-robot merged commit 4772b05 into kubernetes-retired:master Jan 24, 2018

This was referenced Feb 27, 2018

Add crinit aggregated unit tests #114

Closed

validates contents contained in createdRBACObj in aggregated test #209

Merged

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

added crinit aggregated test #170

added crinit aggregated test #170

onyiny-ang commented Jan 9, 2018

font commented Jan 9, 2018

perotinus left a comment

perotinus Jan 10, 2018

perotinus Jan 10, 2018

perotinus Jan 10, 2018

perotinus Jan 10, 2018

onyiny-ang Jan 11, 2018

perotinus Jan 12, 2018

perotinus commented Jan 16, 2018

onyiny-ang commented Jan 16, 2018

onyiny-ang commented Jan 17, 2018

perotinus left a comment

perotinus Jan 18, 2018

onyiny-ang Jan 23, 2018

perotinus Jan 22, 2018

perotinus Jan 22, 2018

perotinus Jan 22, 2018

perotinus Jan 22, 2018

onyiny-ang commented Jan 23, 2018

perotinus left a comment

perotinus Jan 24, 2018

onyiny-ang Jan 24, 2018

perotinus Jan 24, 2018

perotinus Jan 24, 2018

perotinus Jan 24, 2018

onyiny-ang Jan 24, 2018

onyiny-ang Jan 24, 2018 •

edited

Loading

perotinus Jan 24, 2018

perotinus Jan 24, 2018

perotinus commented Jan 24, 2018

k8s-ci-robot commented Jan 24, 2018

added crinit aggregated test #170

added crinit aggregated test #170

Conversation

onyiny-ang commented Jan 9, 2018

font commented Jan 9, 2018

perotinus left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

perotinus commented Jan 16, 2018

onyiny-ang commented Jan 16, 2018

onyiny-ang commented Jan 17, 2018

perotinus left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

onyiny-ang commented Jan 23, 2018

perotinus left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

onyiny-ang Jan 24, 2018 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

perotinus commented Jan 24, 2018

k8s-ci-robot commented Jan 24, 2018

onyiny-ang Jan 24, 2018 •

edited

Loading