-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 10
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
acceptance-tests #29
acceptance-tests #29
Conversation
217858a
to
cdd5b2d
Compare
f7739c5
to
627b018
Compare
* feat(ci): add dependabot bumps for dependencies * fix(ci): Remove dependabot entry for acceptance tests They will be added with #29
8695a4b
to
87c919d
Compare
c72613d
to
3872f9c
Compare
ci: fix missing spruce in path
a36066e
to
55b5873
Compare
7fc31d0
to
346c4ec
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I would really appreciate if we added descriptions with the logical expectation for each of the Expect()
statements.
Failures are then much more easily identified by looking at the logs, and it helps see, verify or question the test expectations.
Co-authored-by: Alexander Lais <alexander.lais@sap.com>
Green integration test after code review changes applied: https://concourse.cfi.sapcloud.io/teams/main/pipelines/pcap-release-dev/jobs/acceptance-tests/builds/92 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I would really like to avoid introducing new technical dept, even if we reuse test code / scripts from HAProxy. Those are not or barely documented. This is the ideal opportunity to improve.
We can / will still unify across haproxy and pcap releases, but if we have a better base to jump off from that would be beneficial for both projects.
} | ||
} | ||
|
||
func downloadFile(info pcapInfo, remotePath string, localFile *os.File, permissions os.FileMode) error { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
We have a follow-up for unifying this. But I also don't want to accept new technical dept into pcap because we just copied from HAProxy. What we build here can be the base of the unified version that we'd also use in HAProxy.
🎉 This PR is included in version 1.1.0 🎉 The release is available on:
Your semantic-release bot 📦🚀 |
Successful integration test run: https://concourse.cfi.sapcloud.io/teams/main/pipelines/pcap-release-dev/jobs/acceptance-tests/builds/89