Skip to content

Conversation

@bparees
Copy link
Contributor

@bparees bparees commented Sep 9, 2017

No description provided.

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the size/XS Denotes a PR that changes 0-9 lines, ignoring generated files. label Sep 9, 2017
@openshift-merge-robot openshift-merge-robot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Sep 9, 2017
@bparees
Copy link
Contributor Author

bparees commented Sep 9, 2017

/assign @csrwng
/unassign @deads2k
/unassign @knobunc

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot assigned csrwng and unassigned deads2k and knobunc Sep 9, 2017

var _ = g.Describe("[builds][Slow] using build configuration runPolicy", func() {
// this test is very latency sensitive so run it by itself (serially).
var _ = g.Describe("[builds][Slow][Serial] using build configuration runPolicy", func() {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Since you're already making this change, might as well get rid of the assignment to var _. I don't see the need for that.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

hm. it's what we do in all our extended tests(not just the builds ones), I assumed it served some initialization purpose/magic.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

"The var _ = ... trick allows us to evaluate the Describe at the top level without having to wrap it in a func init() {}"

(from https://onsi.github.io/ginkgo/)

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

ahh, true you don't need an init. Thx.

@bparees
Copy link
Contributor Author

bparees commented Sep 9, 2017 via email

@csrwng
Copy link
Contributor

csrwng commented Sep 9, 2017

/lgtm

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Sep 9, 2017
@openshift-merge-robot openshift-merge-robot removed the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Sep 9, 2017
@bparees bparees closed this Sep 9, 2017
@csrwng
Copy link
Contributor

csrwng commented Sep 9, 2017

/lgtm

@bparees bparees reopened this Sep 9, 2017
@openshift-merge-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: bparees, csrwng

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

Details Needs approval from an approver in each of these OWNERS Files:

You can indicate your approval by writing /approve in a comment
You can cancel your approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

@bparees bparees added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Sep 9, 2017
@0xmichalis
Copy link
Contributor

/retest

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest

Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes.

@bparees
Copy link
Contributor Author

bparees commented Sep 9, 2017 via email

@bparees
Copy link
Contributor Author

bparees commented Sep 9, 2017 via email

@bparees
Copy link
Contributor Author

bparees commented Sep 9, 2017

/retest

@openshift-merge-robot
Copy link
Contributor

Automatic merge from submit-queue

@openshift-merge-robot openshift-merge-robot merged commit f4483ef into openshift:master Sep 10, 2017
@bparees bparees deleted the serial branch September 15, 2017 01:27
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. size/XS Denotes a PR that changes 0-9 lines, ignoring generated files.

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

8 participants