Separated out tests in a different GHA workflow #84
There are no files selected for viewing
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
| @@ -0,0 +1,42 @@ | ||
| name: Test Plugin | ||
|
|
||
| on: | ||
| push: | ||
| branches-ignore: | ||
| - 'whitesource-remediate/**' | ||
| pull_request: | ||
| types: [opened, synchronize, reopened] | ||
|
|
||
| jobs: | ||
| test: | ||
| strategy: | ||
| matrix: | ||
| test: | ||
| - test jacocoTestReport | ||
| - integTest | ||
| - yamlRestTest | ||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment. also just for understanding, what are yamlRestTests for? There was a problem hiding this comment. It's for testing the rest-api-spec yaml files. We don't have right now for our plugin, but we would in the future. There was a problem hiding this comment. Here's an example test https://github.com/opensearch-project/OpenSearch/blob/1447d75e5e9ea042dd4bb645d71f25aea1fb42a8/modules/geo/src/yamlRestTest/resources/rest-api-spec/test/geo_shape/10_basic.yml ... it tests a search API with specific input and makes sure it gets the expected output. |
||
| os: | ||
| - ubuntu-latest | ||
| - macOS-latest | ||
| - windows-latest | ||
| java: | ||
| - 17 | ||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment. I remember in AD we had to test on 11, 17, 20. Should we do that here too? I think default for 2.x is jdk 11 still but could be wrong There was a problem hiding this comment. @dbwiddis WDYT? Since you worked on the CI initially. There was a problem hiding this comment. https://opensearch.org/docs/latest/install-and-configure/install-opensearch/index/#java-compatibility this is what we have documented and i think java 20 is going to be for 3.x There was a problem hiding this comment. We should probably match whatever OpenSearch tests. |
||
| if: github.repository == 'opensearch-project/opensearch-ai-flow-framework' | ||
| runs-on: ${{ matrix.os }} | ||
| steps: | ||
| - uses: actions/checkout@v4 | ||
|
|
||
| - name: Set up JDK ${{ matrix.java }} | ||
| uses: actions/setup-java@v3 | ||
| with: | ||
| java-version: ${{ matrix.java }} | ||
| distribution: temurin | ||
|
|
||
| - name: Test | ||
| run: ./gradlew ${{ matrix.test }} | ||
|
|
||
| - name: Upload Coverage Report | ||
| if: matrix.os == 'ubuntu-latest' | ||
| uses: codecov/codecov-action@v3 | ||
| with: | ||
| file: ./build/reports/jacoco/test/jacocoTestReport.xml | ||
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.
just wondering, why not use gradlew build here?
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 can. I don't have any strong opinion here. We had check before I kept the same.
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 am good with either,
./gradlew buildmeans we also run assemble which runs the:compileJava, :processResourceswhichcheckdoes also but this does it into a jar.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.
Changed it to build.
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 think we should step back and figure out all the dependencies and figure out what we are trying to optimize here. With the current PR we're shifting the tests somewhere else (still in series so not really gaining much) but duplicating compile/build stuff in parallel.
My general preference would be for CI to keep all the check stuff and
testand code coverage bits, and just spin off the integ tests and yaml tests into another job in parallel (or just put them in the CI yaml at the top level under "jobs").Lots of different ways to do it, haven't really been convinced we have a problem that needs solving yet :)
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 agree with you. I will go ahead and close the PR. We can always come back and open it back when the plugin becomes heavy.