Skip to content
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

Allow conformance tests to run on non-GCE providers #26932

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jun 21, 2016

Conversation

aaronlevy
Copy link
Contributor

@aaronlevy aaronlevy commented Jun 7, 2016

fixes #26869

Creates a skeleton provider which has all the required function stubs -- but will allow a previously set "skeleton" KUBERNETES_PROVIDER to not be overriden with "gce".

@k8s-bot
Copy link

k8s-bot commented Jun 7, 2016

Can one of the admins verify that this patch is reasonable to test? If so, please reply "ok to test".
(Note: "add to whitelist" is no longer supported. Please update configurations in kubernetes/test-infra/jenkins/job-configs/kubernetes-jenkins-pull instead.)

This message may repeat a few times in short succession due to jenkinsci/ghprb-plugin#292. Sorry.

Otherwise, if this message is too spammy, please complain to ixdy.

2 similar comments
@k8s-bot
Copy link

k8s-bot commented Jun 7, 2016

Can one of the admins verify that this patch is reasonable to test? If so, please reply "ok to test".
(Note: "add to whitelist" is no longer supported. Please update configurations in kubernetes/test-infra/jenkins/job-configs/kubernetes-jenkins-pull instead.)

This message may repeat a few times in short succession due to jenkinsci/ghprb-plugin#292. Sorry.

Otherwise, if this message is too spammy, please complain to ixdy.

@k8s-bot
Copy link

k8s-bot commented Jun 7, 2016

Can one of the admins verify that this patch is reasonable to test? If so, please reply "ok to test".
(Note: "add to whitelist" is no longer supported. Please update configurations in kubernetes/test-infra/jenkins/job-configs/kubernetes-jenkins-pull instead.)

This message may repeat a few times in short succession due to jenkinsci/ghprb-plugin#292. Sorry.

Otherwise, if this message is too spammy, please complain to ixdy.

@k8s-github-robot k8s-github-robot added size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files. release-note-label-needed labels Jun 7, 2016
aaronlevy added a commit to aaronlevy/kubernetes that referenced this pull request Jun 7, 2016
# prefix gets appended to itslef, with some extra information
# need tot keep it short
export KUBE_GCE_INSTANCE_PREFIX="${USER}-${zone}"
export KUBE_GCE_ZONE="$zone"
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

these lines should be indented from the if statement

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

These are just converting from a mix of space/tab to tab only. So:

function set-federated-zone-vars {
\tif [[ "$KUBERNETES_PROVIDER" == "gce"  ]];then
\t\texport KUBE_GCE_ZONE="$zone"

Did you want something else? Also, I'm fine with dropping the whitespace changes from this PR (unrelated). I was just already in the file and the space/tab mixed block rendered weird for me.

@aaronlevy
Copy link
Contributor Author

In the interest of not having this block on whitespace, I've dropped the space->tab changes.

@roberthbailey roberthbailey added lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. release-note Denotes a PR that will be considered when it comes time to generate release notes. and removed release-note-label-needed labels Jun 7, 2016
@roberthbailey roberthbailey added this to the v1.3 milestone Jun 7, 2016
@aaronlevy
Copy link
Contributor Author

Just squashed changes. Probably going to drop the lgtm label....

@k8s-github-robot k8s-github-robot removed the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Jun 7, 2016
@aaronlevy
Copy link
Contributor Author

@roberthbailey I believe the test failure is unrelated to this change. Possible to get a re-test?

@k8s-github-robot
Copy link

@yifan-gu
You must link to the test flake issue which caused you to request this manual re-test.
Re-test requests should be in the form of: k8s-bot test this issue: #<number>
Here is the list of open test flakes.

@roberthbailey
Copy link
Contributor

@pwittrock the node e2e test failed. can you investigate / kick it?

@dchen1107
Copy link
Member

@k8s-bot node e2e test this issue: #IGNORE

@dchen1107 dchen1107 self-assigned this Jun 10, 2016
@dchen1107 dchen1107 added the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Jun 10, 2016
@dchen1107
Copy link
Member

LGTM

@roberthbailey
Copy link
Contributor

@k8s-bot test this issue: #27276

@k8s-bot
Copy link

k8s-bot commented Jun 14, 2016

Can one of the admins verify that this patch is reasonable to test? If so, please reply "ok to test".
(Note: "add to whitelist" is no longer supported. Please update configurations in kubernetes/test-infra/jenkins/job-configs/kubernetes-jenkins-pull instead.)

This message may repeat a few times in short succession due to jenkinsci/ghprb-plugin#292. Sorry.

Otherwise, if this message is too spammy, please complain to ixdy.

1 similar comment
@k8s-bot
Copy link

k8s-bot commented Jun 15, 2016

Can one of the admins verify that this patch is reasonable to test? If so, please reply "ok to test".
(Note: "add to whitelist" is no longer supported. Please update configurations in kubernetes/test-infra/jenkins/job-configs/kubernetes-jenkins-pull instead.)

This message may repeat a few times in short succession due to jenkinsci/ghprb-plugin#292. Sorry.

Otherwise, if this message is too spammy, please complain to ixdy.

@roberthbailey
Copy link
Contributor

ok to test

aaronlevy added a commit to aaronlevy/kubernetes that referenced this pull request Jun 16, 2016
@aaronlevy
Copy link
Contributor Author

Any thoughts on marking this as a p1 to try and get it into the 1.3 release. Kind of a bummer if non-GCE installations can't easily run conformance tests...

@roberthbailey
Copy link
Contributor

It's marked for the release, but the node e2e test needs to pass before the submit queue will look at it.

@pwittrock can you take a quick look at the node e2e failure?

aaronlevy added a commit to aaronlevy/kubernetes that referenced this pull request Jun 17, 2016
@goltermann
Copy link
Contributor

@dchen1107 @pwittrock who can take a look at these e2e node failures?

@dchen1107
Copy link
Member

It is known issue #27296

@k8s-bot test this issue: #27296

@goltermann
Copy link
Contributor

@k8s-bot e2e test this issue: #IGNORE

@goltermann
Copy link
Contributor

git checkout failed, didn't test anything

@k8s-bot e2e test this issue: #IGNORE

1 similar comment
@goltermann
Copy link
Contributor

git checkout failed, didn't test anything

@k8s-bot e2e test this issue: #IGNORE

@goltermann
Copy link
Contributor

@aaronlevy we'll need this test investigated and in the queue soon (today-ish) if this is still needed for the v1.3 release. Please take a look.

@aaronlevy
Copy link
Contributor Author

@goltermann I might be missing something in the logs, but not sure if I can triage this error externally:

Failed to setup provider config: Error building GCE/GKE provider: googleapi: Error 500: Internal Error, internalError

@goltermann
Copy link
Contributor

Thanks for looking, that's not exactly debuggable, I agree.

@k8s-bot e2e test this issue: #IGNORE

@k8s-bot
Copy link

k8s-bot commented Jun 21, 2016

GCE e2e build/test passed for commit e8d1dae.

@k8s-github-robot
Copy link

@k8s-bot test this [submit-queue is verifying that this PR is safe to merge]

aaronlevy added a commit to aaronlevy/kubernetes that referenced this pull request Jun 21, 2016
@k8s-bot
Copy link

k8s-bot commented Jun 21, 2016

GCE e2e build/test passed for commit e8d1dae.

@k8s-github-robot
Copy link

Automatic merge from submit-queue

@k8s-github-robot k8s-github-robot merged commit 0e562d2 into kubernetes:master Jun 21, 2016
@k8s-bot
Copy link

k8s-bot commented Jun 21, 2016

GCE e2e build/test passed for commit e8d1dae.

@aaronlevy aaronlevy deleted the conformance-fix branch June 22, 2016 16:10
xingzhou pushed a commit to xingzhou/kubernetes that referenced this pull request Dec 15, 2016
Automatic merge from submit-queue

Allow conformance tests to run on non-GCE providers

fixes kubernetes#26869

Creates a skeleton provider which has all the required function stubs -- but will allow a previously set "skeleton" KUBERNETES_PROVIDER to not be overriden with "gce".
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. release-note Denotes a PR that will be considered when it comes time to generate release notes. size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Could not run conformance testing on local cluster
7 participants