Fix functionality (audit, loglevel) tests to actually wait for changes #233
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
This functionality test has been failing since we did our last bump.
It was honestly never really testing anything because it never waited for the deployments, we were mostly getting lucky and not checking errors. See this run for an example of the old "tests nothing and succeeds" behavior: https://github.com/kedacore/keda-olm-operator/actions/runs/8209089746/job/22472571935
This change is basically:
testCase
annotation to the deployment containing the test case name when we attempt an attribute changeI'm not in love with this fix, but I think it should be dependable until we can make some deliberate decisions/refactors.
NOTE: The audit config tests don't work right either, but I only wiggled them a little bit, because they are harder to solve because the functionality they are testing is currently broken, i.e. you can't currently deconfigure audit, so you can't ever reset the operator to a "clean" state to try the next test case. (That has to do with how we calculate our manifestival changes from the previous manifest and not the base manifest, and how we only transform if our values are non-empty [1] [2] ). We can and probably should fix that later.
Checklist
Fixes #