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

Ensure we have one scenario per automation file #379

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Sep 4, 2024
Merged

Ensure we have one scenario per automation file #379

merged 1 commit into from
Sep 4, 2024

Conversation

cjeanner
Copy link
Contributor

@cjeanner cjeanner commented Aug 29, 2024 •
edited
Loading

This is in addition to a coming PR, #383. This change here is allowing
to ensure we follow those practices:

  • only one scenario per file
  • filename matches "scenario_name.yaml" pattern

@openshift-ci OpenShift CI
Copy link

openshift-ci bot commented Aug 29, 2024

Skipping CI for Draft Pull Request.
If you want CI signal for your change, please convert it to an actual PR.
You can still manually trigger a test run with /test all

@openshift-ci OpenShift CI
Copy link

openshift-ci bot commented Aug 29, 2024

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: cjeanner

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

@cjeanner cjeanner mentioned this pull request Aug 29, 2024
Merged
@cjeanner cjeanner force-pushed the linter/split-automation branch 3 times, most recently from 4a5a749 to b4c9b75 Compare September 3, 2024 05:30
This was referenced Sep 3, 2024
Merged
Merged
@cjeanner
Ensure we have one scenario per automation file
ab9c91e 
This is in addition to a coming PR, #375. This change here is allowing
to ensure we follow those practices:
- only one scenario per file
- filename matches "scenario_name.yaml" pattern
@cjeanner cjeanner marked this pull request as ready for review September 4, 2024 09:10
@cjeanner
Copy link
Contributor Author

cjeanner commented Sep 4, 2024

/override ci/prow/images
/override ci/prow/unit

Prow has some issues. The tests aren't relevant for this PR anyway.

@openshift-ci OpenShift CI
Copy link

openshift-ci bot commented Sep 4, 2024

@cjeanner: Overrode contexts on behalf of cjeanner: ci/prow/images, ci/prow/unit

In response to this:

/override ci/prow/images
/override ci/prow/unit

Prow has some issues. The tests aren't relevant for this PR anyway.

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository.

@raukadah
Copy link
Contributor

raukadah commented Sep 4, 2024

/retest

@raukadah
Copy link
Contributor

raukadah commented Sep 4, 2024

/lgtm

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the lgtm label Sep 4, 2024
@softwarefactory-project-zuul softwarefactory-project-zuul
Copy link
Contributor

Build succeeded (gate pipeline).
https://softwarefactory-project.io/zuul/t/rdoproject.org/buildset/b45c0a44d887492ba1c7d2c6b6910a1c

✔️ noop SUCCESS in 0s

@softwarefactory-project-zuul softwarefactory-project-zuul bot merged commit 07cc650 into main Sep 4, 2024
9 checks passed
raukadah added a commit to raukadah/architecture that referenced this pull request Sep 10, 2024
@raukadah
Backport default.yaml split patches
23a4e5d 
It backports following patches:
openstack-k8s-operators#375 -  Move automation default vars into seperate scenario files
openstack-k8s-operators#383 - Drop default.yaml file
openstack-k8s-operators#379 - Ensure we have one scenario per automation file
openstack-k8s-operators#384 - Move bgp_dt01 into its own automation file

Signed-off-by: Chandan Kumar (raukadah) <[email protected]>
@raukadah raukadah mentioned this pull request Sep 10, 2024
Merged
raukadah added a commit to raukadah/architecture that referenced this pull request Sep 11, 2024
@raukadah
Backport default.yaml split patches
613f451 
It backports following patches:
openstack-k8s-operators#375 -  Move automation default vars into seperate scenario files
openstack-k8s-operators#383 - Drop default.yaml file
openstack-k8s-operators#379 - Ensure we have one scenario per automation file
openstack-k8s-operators#384 - Move bgp_dt01 into its own automation file
openstack-k8s-operators#373 - NFV-HCI minor fixes

Signed-off-by: Chandan Kumar (raukadah) <[email protected]>
softwarefactory-project-zuul bot added a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 11, 2024
@softwarefactory-project-zuul
Merge pull request #394 from raukadah/sync_patches
ab2e02a 
Backport default.yaml split patches

It backports following patches:

#375
#383
#379
#384
#373

Reviewed-by: Ella Shulman <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Cédric Jeanneret
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@fultonj fultonj Awaiting requested review from fultonj

@raukadah raukadah Awaiting requested review from raukadah

Assignees

@raukadah raukadah

Labels
approved lgtm
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
2 participants
@cjeanner @raukadah