Skip to content
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

[WIP] Add e2e tests for kubectl plugin #3893

Closed
wants to merge 2 commits into from

Conversation

alexkursell
Copy link
Contributor

What this PR does / why we need it: This PR adds e2e tests for the ingress-nginx kubectl plugin. It also adds tests for the commands added by #3870, so this should not be merged until that is.

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. label Mar 13, 2019
@alexkursell alexkursell changed the title [WIP] Add e2e tests for kubectl plugins [WIP] Add e2e tests for kubectl plugin Mar 13, 2019
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files. labels Mar 13, 2019
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: alexkursell
To fully approve this pull request, please assign additional approvers.
We suggest the following additional approver: elvinefendi

If they are not already assigned, you can assign the PR to them by writing /assign @elvinefendi in a comment when ready.

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

@alexkursell alexkursell force-pushed the add-plugin-e2e-tests branch from 35c5479 to d0bf8a4 Compare March 14, 2019 14:38
@ElvinEfendi
Copy link
Member

@alexkursell would it be easier to stick to unit tests only for the plugin?

@alexkursell
Copy link
Contributor Author

@alexkursell would it be easier to stick to unit tests only for the plugin?

Yes. e2e testing this is kind of painful, and I don't really see that much benefit to it. I'll see what in the plugin can be unit tested. Closing this for now.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants