Skip to content

Conversation

@xeniape
Copy link
Member

@xeniape xeniape commented Mar 13, 2025

Description

Integration test had errors:

Definition of Done Checklist

  • Not all of these items are applicable to all PRs, the author should update this template to only leave the boxes in that are relevant
  • Please make sure all these things are done and tick the boxes
# Author
- [ ] Changes are OpenShift compatible
- [ ] CRD changes approved
- [ ] CRD documentation for all fields, following the [style guide](https://docs.stackable.tech/home/nightly/contributor/docs/style-guide).
- [ ] Helm chart can be installed and deployed operator works
- [ ] Integration tests passed (for non trivial changes)
- [ ] Changes need to be "offline" compatible
# Reviewer
- [ ] Code contains useful comments
- [ ] Code contains useful logging statements
- [ ] (Integration-)Test cases added
- [ ] Documentation added or updated. Follows the [style guide](https://docs.stackable.tech/home/nightly/contributor/docs/style-guide).
- [ ] Changelog updated
- [ ] Cargo.toml only contains references to git tags (not specific commits or branches)
# Acceptance
- [ ] Feature Tracker has been updated
- [ ] Proper release label has been added
- [ ] [Roadmap](https://github.com/orgs/stackabletech/projects/25/views/1) has been updated

@xeniape xeniape self-assigned this Mar 13, 2025
@xeniape xeniape moved this to Development: Waiting for Review in Stackable Engineering Mar 13, 2025
@xeniape xeniape requested a review from a team March 13, 2025 09:17
@adwk67 adwk67 requested review from adwk67 and removed request for a team March 13, 2025 09:40
@adwk67 adwk67 moved this from Development: Waiting for Review to Development: In Review in Stackable Engineering Mar 13, 2025
@sbernauer sbernauer self-requested a review March 13, 2025 09:40
Copy link
Member

@sbernauer sbernauer left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Code change LGTM, thanks for fixing this!
Looking at

- name: opa-authorization
dimensions:
- trino-latest
, IMHO it would make sense to run the opa-authorization test for all supported Trino versions and not only the latest (think e.g. of LTS users). Especially as this is security-related and we have many Trino users.

However, I know that this requires a bit of jinja templating based on the Trino version.
Not blocking the PR on this though

@xeniape
Copy link
Member Author

xeniape commented Mar 13, 2025

Code change LGTM, thanks for fixing this! Looking at

- name: opa-authorization
dimensions:
- trino-latest

, IMHO it would make sense to run the opa-authorization test for all supported Trino versions and not only the latest (think e.g. of LTS users). Especially as this is security-related and we have many Trino users.

However, I know that this requires a bit of jinja templating based on the Trino version. Not blocking the PR on this though

I can look at it in a follow-up (or someone else if interested), thanks 👍

@xeniape xeniape added this pull request to the merge queue Mar 13, 2025
Merged via the queue into main with commit 4ecbf08 Mar 13, 2025
16 of 17 checks passed
@xeniape xeniape deleted the chore/fix-integration-test branch March 13, 2025 10:06
@adwk67
Copy link
Member

adwk67 commented Mar 13, 2025

Also checked on OpenShift :)

@sbernauer sbernauer moved this from Development: In Review to Development: Done in Stackable Engineering Mar 14, 2025
@lfrancke lfrancke moved this from Development: Done to Done in Stackable Engineering Mar 26, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

Archived in project

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants