test: [various] - Improve stability of Linode end-to-end tests #11350
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Cloud Manager UI test results🎉 459 passing tests on test run #2 ↗︎
|
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Description 📝
Various improvements to our Linode end-to-end tests to reduce flakiness. Mostly revolves around increasing the Linode create timeout and ensuring the timeout is used in the tests.
There are still a couple tests I want to look at, putting this in draft for now to see how the tests run in CI in their current state. Will take this out of draft when it's ready for review.
Changes 🔄
List any change(s) relevant to the reviewer.
Target release date 🗓️
Please specify a release date (and environment, if applicable) to guarantee timely review of this PR. If exact date is not known, please approximate and update it as needed.
Preview 📷
Include a screenshot or screen recording of the change.
🔒 Use the Mask Sensitive Data setting for security.
💡 Use
<video src="" />tag when including recordings in table.How to test 🧪
Prerequisites
(How to setup test environment)
Reproduction steps
(How to reproduce the issue, if applicable)
Verification steps
(How to verify changes)
Author Checklists
As an Author, to speed up the review process, I considered 🤔
👀 Doing a self review
❔ Our contribution guidelines
🤏 Splitting feature into small PRs
➕ Adding a changeset
🧪 Providing/improving test coverage
🔐 Removing all sensitive information from the code and PR description
🚩 Using a feature flag to protect the release
👣 Providing comprehensive reproduction steps
📑 Providing or updating our documentation
🕛 Scheduling a pair reviewing session
📱 Providing mobile support
♿ Providing accessibility support
As an Author, before moving this PR from Draft to Open, I confirmed ✅
Commit message and pull request title format standards
<commit type>: [JIRA-ticket-number] - <description>Commit Types:
feat: New feature for the user (not a part of the code, or ci, ...).fix: Bugfix for the user (not a fix to build something, ...).change: Modifying an existing visual UI instance. Such as a component or a feature.refactor: Restructuring existing code without changing its external behavior or visual UI. Typically to improve readability, maintainability, and performance.test: New tests or changes to existing tests. Does not change the production code.upcoming: A new feature that is in progress, not visible to users yet, and usually behind a feature flag.Example:
feat: [M3-1234] - Allow user to view their login history