-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 552
OCPBUGS-44199: Allow spaces in AWS tags #2124
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Merged
openshift-merge-bot
merged 2 commits into
openshift:master
from
patrickdillon:aws-tag-space
Feb 13, 2025
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
2 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or 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
This file contains hidden or 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
This file contains hidden or 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
This file contains hidden or 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
This file contains hidden or 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
This file contains hidden or 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
Oops, something went wrong.
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.
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'm not sure what to do here with the
cloudLoadBalancerConfig
. The tests seem to be failing both when I include it and when I don't. I am not including it, because the field is feature gatedhttps://github.com/patrickdillon/api/blob/f4e9b1854e85290d8adb4ae4494496e1a639eb33/config/v1/types_infrastructure.go#L523
And that feature gate is not in the default feature set, so the field shouldn't be included here, right?
But the failing test complains about it:
So I try adding it like below, and that also fails...
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.
@JoelSpeed it seems that the problem is that tests for TechPreview (etc) as well as the Default feature set are run on the AAA_ungated tests. So if I don't include the
cloudLoadBalancerConfig
the TechPreview (etc) tests fail, but if I do include thecloudLoadBalancerConfig
tests for the Default set fail (current status of PR). I'm probably doing something wrong, but not sure what that is... WDYT?Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
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.
Which gate is
cloudLoadBalancerConfig
behind? You will need to either include or exclude the gate in your test featuregates list.As you aren't gating this change, you would exclude the gate
-GateName
within the list of feature gates for your testThere 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.
Ok I did that in 0d10a56 and it seemed to resolve the issue. Thanks!
As this is in the AAA_ungated.yaml test file, it seems like we should potentially skip the non-default feature sets? Not sure if that is possible. A downside of doing that, though, is the tests would need to be updated upon graduation of features to the default feature set...
I'm definitely fine with this, if you are.
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.
In general we want the tests to run against all versions so that we ensure the ungated tests do not break because of a new gated addition
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
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.
In this case, that is impossible, right? I suppose if the gate did not have default statuses, then it might not break the tests; but would it be exercising/proving anything?
It's probably my own lack of knowledge, but I don't understand the testing scenario. Just asking for my own understanding/potential process improvement. It's solved for this PR.
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.
Yes, for the tests you're adding, because they leverage part of the API, which has a newly gated default value, it makes it impossible.
If you were to split the new tests into a separate file, the remaining ungated tests should in theory be able to continue to run.
I believe that's possible without anything complaining 🤔