[WIP] API-1835: json-patch integration test #49
Conversation
|
@p0lyn0mial: This pull request references API-1835 which is a valid jira issue. Warning: The referenced jira issue has an invalid target version for the target branch this PR targets: expected the epic to target the "4.18.0" version, but no target version was set. In response to this: Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository. |
openshift-ci-robot
added
the
jira/valid-reference
openshift-ci
bot
added
the
do-not-merge/work-in-progress
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: p0lyn0mial The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. The pull request process is described here
Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
openshift-ci
bot
added
the
approved
| @@ -241,7 +241,7 @@ func allPossibleListFileLocations(sourceFS fs.FS, requestInfo *apirequest.Reques | |||
|
|
|||
| namespaces, err := allNamespacesWithData(sourceFS) | |||
| if err != nil { | |||
| return nil, fmt.Errorf("unable to read namespaces: %w", err) | |||
| return allPossibleListFileLocations, fmt.Errorf("unable to read namespaces: %w", err) | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
it seems that requiring namespaces is not necessary when the input contains only cluster-scoped-resources (my test), wdyt?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
|
@p0lyn0mial: The following tests failed, say
Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard. Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository. I understand the commands that are listed here. |
| @@ -215,6 +215,9 @@ func (mrt *writeTrackingRoundTripper) roundTrip(req *http.Request) ([]byte, erro | |||
| ret.SetNamespace(serializedRequest.ActionMetadata.Namespace) | |||
| if actionHasRuntimeObjectBody { // TODO might be able to do something generally based on discovery if absolutely necessary | |||
| ret.SetGroupVersionKind(bodyObj.GetObjectKind().GroupVersionKind()) | |||
| } else | |||
| { | |||
| ret.SetGroupVersionKind(schema.GroupVersionKind{Group: gvr.Group, Version: gvr.Version, Kind: "Authentication"}) | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
kube returns the patched/updated object (full obj) in the response, so we need at least an empty GVK. We could use discovery for this, wdyt?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
yes, let's get that fixed.
| @@ -0,0 +1 @@ | |||
| [{"op":"test","path":"/status/conditions/2/type","value":"WebhookAuthenticatorCertApprover_OpenShiftAuthenticatorDegraded"},{"op":"remove","path":"/status/conditions/2"}] | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
want to format these in the future, one per line?
No description provided.