fix(e2e): make operator group test more robust #603
Conversation
openshift-ci-robot
added
the
size/L
| @@ -388,6 +388,7 @@ func (a *Operator) ensureClusterRoles(op *v1alpha2.OperatorGroup) error { | |||
| }, | |||
| Rules: apiEditPolicyRules, | |||
| } | |||
| //ownerutil.AddNonBlockingOwner(operatorGroupEditClusterRole, csv) | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm wondering if this would be good to have?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Right now, this is useful for requeuing owner CSV.
| @@ -116,10 +116,11 @@ func TestOperatorGroup(t *testing.T) { | |||
| require.NoError(t, err) | |||
|
|
|||
| t.Log("Creating CRD") | |||
| mainCRDPlural := genName("ins") | |||
| apiGroup := "cluster.com" | |||
| mainCRDPlural := genName("opgroup") | |||
|
#588 would be a good candidate to go in first, but maybe nothing else is needed. |
jpeeler
force-pushed
the
operator-group-robust
branch
from
36dffd8 to
630721d
Compare
This checks rbac rules more carefully and adds polling to make the test more robust.
jpeeler
force-pushed
the
operator-group-robust
branch
from
630721d to
42a4912
Compare
|
/test e2e-aws |
|
@jpeeler: The following test failed, say
Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard. Please help us cut down on flakes by linking to an open issue when you hit one in your PR. 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/test-infra repository. I understand the commands that are listed here. |
|
/approve |
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: ecordell 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-robot
added
the
approved
…-robust fix(e2e): make operator group test more robust
This PR should be the last of the operator group related PRs since it pulls in fixes from other PRs (and should be rebased on top of them after they get merged). FWIW, some of the lack of robustness here is due to resources unexpectedly existing from other tests.