-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 715
fix: use inferred supported features to set extendedSupportedFeatures #4113
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
k8s-ci-robot
merged 3 commits into
kubernetes-sigs:main
from
snorwin:fix-inferred-supported-features
Sep 23, 2025
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
3 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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
It's a temporary variable until final supported features are determined for testing and NewConformanceTestSuite returns ConformanceTestSuite. Nothing limits it's scope until suite is initialized. There's no scope conflict or a misleading name so I don't see why it should go out of usage after suite is initialized. it's the sound representation of populated features from the Status field.
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 my opinion, it doesn’t make sense to use
supportedFeaturesafter it has already been assigned tosuite.SupportedFeatures. Modifying it at that point would even be incorrect, why should we still rely on it?In case additional code was inserted above this section that changed
suite.SupportedFeatures, then the logic here is supposed to use the actual (possibly modified) features of the suite (suite.SupportedFeatures) rather than the originally derived ones insupportedFeatures.If it is important that
supportedFeaturesis used in this part, I would suggest moving the entire section before the initialization of theConformanceTestSuiteobject.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.
It is actually a really good idea to move the whole section before initializing the ConformanceTestSuite.
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.
@bexxmodd could you take a close look at the refactoring? I simplified the logic quite a bit.
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.
This is way cleaner! Thanks Norwin!