Skip to content

Conversation

@YaoZengzeng
Copy link
Member

No description provided.

Signed-off-by: YaoZengzeng <yaozengzeng@huawei.com>
@volcano-sh-bot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by:
Once this PR has been reviewed and has the lgtm label, please ask for approval from yaozengzeng. For more information see the Kubernetes Code Review Process.

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

Details Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

@gemini-code-assist
Copy link
Contributor

Summary of Changes

Hello @YaoZengzeng, I'm Gemini Code Assist1! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed!

This pull request enhances the end-to-end testing workflow by introducing an option to bypass the time-consuming setup phase. This allows developers to quickly re-run tests against an existing, pre-configured Kubernetes cluster, streamlining the development and debugging cycle for e2e tests.

Highlights

  • New E2E_SKIP_SETUP variable: Introduced a new environment variable, E2E_SKIP_SETUP, to control the execution of the e2e test setup process.
  • Conditional Setup Execution: Modified the run_e2e.sh script to conditionally skip all setup steps, including Kind cluster creation, image building, and service deployments, when E2E_SKIP_SETUP is set to true.
  • Documentation Update: Updated the test/e2e/README.md to document the new E2E_SKIP_SETUP variable, explaining its purpose and providing an example of its usage.

🧠 New Feature in Public Preview: You can now enable Memory to help Gemini Code Assist learn from your team's feedback. This makes future code reviews more consistent and personalized to your project's style. Click here to enable Memory in your admin console.

Using Gemini Code Assist

The full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips.

Invoking Gemini

You can request assistance from Gemini at any point by creating a comment using either /gemini <command> or @gemini-code-assist <command>. Below is a summary of the supported commands on the current page.

Feature Command Description
Code Review /gemini review Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state.
Pull Request Summary /gemini summary Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state.
Comment @gemini-code-assist Responds in comments when explicitly tagged, both in pull request comments and review comments.
Help /gemini help Displays a list of available commands.

Customization

To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a .gemini/ folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.

Limitations & Feedback

Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for Github and other Google products, sign up here.

You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension.

Footnotes

  1. Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configure Gemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution.

Copy link
Contributor

@gemini-code-assist gemini-code-assist bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Code Review

This pull request introduces a new E2E_SKIP_SETUP environment variable to allow skipping the entire setup phase for e2e tests. This is a useful feature for faster re-runs when the test environment is already configured. The changes correctly implement this logic in run_e2e.sh and update the README.md with documentation for the new option. My review includes one suggestion to improve the script's readability and maintainability by refactoring the new conditional logic.

@codecov-commenter
Copy link

codecov-commenter commented Jan 23, 2026

⚠️ Please install the 'codecov app svg image' to ensure uploads and comments are reliably processed by Codecov.

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
⚠️ Please upload report for BASE (main@ecea52a). Learn more about missing BASE report.
❗ Your organization needs to install the Codecov GitHub app to enable full functionality.

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main     #167   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage        ?   34.34%           
=======================================
  Files           ?       29           
  Lines           ?     2533           
  Branches        ?        0           
=======================================
  Hits            ?      870           
  Misses          ?     1540           
  Partials        ?      123           
Flag Coverage Δ
unittests 34.34% <ø> (?)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

Signed-off-by: YaoZengzeng <yaozengzeng@huawei.com>
@YaoZengzeng
Copy link
Member Author

@hzxuzhonghu ptal

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants