Terraform removal from infrastructure reconciler #596
Conversation
gardener-robot
added
area/control-plane
|
@elchead Thank you for your contribution. |
|
@elchead You need rebase this pull request with latest master branch. Please check. |
gardener-robot
added
needs/review
|
Thank you @elchead for your contribution. Before I can start building your PR, a member of the organization must set the required label(s) {'reviewed/ok-to-test'}. Once started, you can check the build status in the PR checks section below. |
| extensionsv1alpha1 "github.com/gardener/gardener/pkg/apis/extensions/v1alpha1" | ||
| ) | ||
|
|
||
| // MakeCluster returns a cluster object used for testing. | ||
| func MakeCluster(pods, services string, region string, countFaultDomain, countUpdateDomain int32) *controller.Cluster { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Let's not group testing code with production code.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I agree its suboptimal, but its an internal package. Should i create an entirely new test package that can be shared across different pkg tests?
E.g. pkg/internal/infrastructure/test ?
| // TODO copy from AWS PR (use taskBuilder component to share?) | ||
| // addTask adds a wrapped task for the given task function and options. | ||
| func (f FlowReconciler) addTask(g *flow.Graph, name string, fn flow.TaskFn, options ...shared.TaskOption) flow.TaskIDer { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think you can use the "shared" library version for that now.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Martin's flowContext has a persistor which I don't need and I cannot opt out. Since it's only very few code and since the libraries are not synced at the moment at any rate, I would defer the refactor to opt out of the persistor until the libraries are really shared
|
/test |
|
Testrun: e2e-q88m8 +---------------------+---------------------+-----------+----------+ | NAME | STEP | PHASE | DURATION | +---------------------+---------------------+-----------+----------+ | infrastructure-test | infrastructure-test | Succeeded | 33m38s | | bastion-test | bastion-test | Succeeded | 11m3s | +---------------------+---------------------+-----------+----------+ |
|
/reviewed ok-to-test |
gardener-robot
added
the
reviewed/ok-to-test
gardener-robot-ci-1
added
needs/ok-to-test
|
/test |
|
Testrun: e2e-b4fz7 +--------------------------+--------------------------+-----------+----------+ | NAME | STEP | PHASE | DURATION | +--------------------------+--------------------------+-----------+----------+ | infrastructure-test | infrastructure-test | Succeeded | 35m6s | | infrastructure-test-flow | infrastructure-test-flow | Failed | 5m20s | | bastion-test | bastion-test | Succeeded | 10m30s | +--------------------------+--------------------------+-----------+----------+ |
|
/test |
|
Testrun: e2e-zcmzw +--------------------------+--------------------------+--------+----------+ | NAME | STEP | PHASE | DURATION | +--------------------------+--------------------------+--------+----------+ | infrastructure-test | infrastructure-test | Failed | 42m35s | | infrastructure-test-flow | infrastructure-test-flow | Failed | 1h5m53s | | bastion-test | bastion-test | Failed | 12m27s | +--------------------------+--------------------------+--------+----------+ |
elchead
force-pushed
the
terraform-rm
branch
2 times, most recently
from
d50207a to
5a7f047
Compare
|
@kon-angelo can you mention the PR when the feature gets merged? |
gardener-robot
added
the
status/closed
How to categorize this PR?
/area control-plane
/kind enhancement
/platform azure
What this PR does / why we need it:
Reconciliation of infrastructure resources are managed directly with a graph flow and using Azure SDK client API instead of using Terraformer.
Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
Fixes #411
Special notes for your reviewer:
Release note: