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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Local development story for conformance tests #608

Closed
bobcatfish opened this issue Apr 9, 2018 · 3 comments
Closed

Local development story for conformance tests #608

bobcatfish opened this issue Apr 9, 2018 · 3 comments
Assignees
@bobcatfish
Labels
area/test-and-release It flags unit/e2e/conformance/perf test issues for product features kind/spec Discussion of how a feature should be exposed to customers.

Comments

@bobcatfish
Copy link
Contributor

Expected Behavior

It should be clear from the docs:

  • What the expected development flow is for contributors re. the conformance tests
  • How contributors can easily get started running the conformance tests
    It should also be as easily as possible to run the tests locally (e.g. minikube or similar)

Actual Behavior

  • Docs are okay for reference, if you already know how to run the tests, but not very friendly to folks running the tests for the first time
  • Tests probably don't work with minikube
  • A lot of setup is required to run the tests
  • It's not clear when contributors should run these tests (or if they should at all)
@bobcatfish bobcatfish self-assigned this Apr 9, 2018
@bobcatfish bobcatfish mentioned this issue Apr 9, 2018
Closed
@mattmoor mattmoor added the area/test-and-release It flags unit/e2e/conformance/perf test issues for product features label Apr 9, 2018
@bobcatfish bobcatfish mentioned this issue Apr 12, 2018
Closed
@evankanderson
Copy link
Member

Is there still work to do here?

/kind spec

@google-prow-robot google-prow-robot added the kind/spec Discussion of how a feature should be exposed to customers. label Jun 22, 2018
@bobcatfish
Copy link
Contributor Author

Is there still work to do here?

Yep currently working on it! At the moment, even with #1332, Routes do not become ready. I have hope tho!

google-prow-robot pushed a commit that referenced this issue Jun 27, 2018
@bobcatfish @google-prow-robot
Update minikube docs post rename (#1332)
8752b6b 
The docs for setting up minikube were using the namespaces and
resource names from elafros instead of knative. The naming changed
slightly, e.g. a knative controller is now called `controller`
instead of `knative-serving-controller`, so one of the loops had
to be broken into 2 statements.

Added steps about redeploying pods after setting up GCR
secrets b/c there is a chicken and egg problem where the namespaces
must exist before you can setup the secrets, but the secrets must
exist before the images can be pulled.

The PR that enabled `MutatingAdmissionWebhook` by default
(kubernetes/minikube#2547) was merged, but
the latest minikube (0.28.0) still did not enable this option
by default b/c providing any arugments overrides all of the defaults,
so we must still set it explicitly.

Made it clear in the setting up knative serving docs that the cluster
admin binding is required, not just for istio.

Use a `NodePort` instead of a `LoadBalancer`
(see kubernetes/minikube#384) - another
step along the road to #608.
@bobcatfish
Copy link
Contributor Author

Yep currently working on it! At the moment, even with #1332, Routes do not become ready. I have hope tho!

Whoops nope, got this confused with #609, which I think will solve this issue.

Sigh that also means I tagged the wrong issues in my commit messages... oh well, too late :(

ReToCode pushed a commit to ReToCode/serving that referenced this issue Feb 5, 2024
@skonto
disable internal encryption (knative#608)
62e2c01
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees

@bobcatfish bobcatfish

Labels
area/test-and-release It flags unit/e2e/conformance/perf test issues for product features kind/spec Discussion of how a feature should be exposed to customers.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
4 participants
@bobcatfish @mattmoor @evankanderson @google-prow-robot