Add tmt integration plan #27140
Add tmt integration plan #27140
Conversation
|
Adding the "do-not-merge/release-note-label-needed" label because no release-note block was detected, please follow our release note process to remove it. 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. |
openshift-ci
bot
added
the
do-not-merge/release-note-label-needed
LecrisUT
force-pushed
the
tmt-integration
branch
from
d1ad4f6 to
8be8e74
Compare
|
[NON-BLOCKING] Packit jobs failed. @containers/packit-build please check. Everyone else, feel free to ignore. |
3 similar comments
|
[NON-BLOCKING] Packit jobs failed. @containers/packit-build please check. Everyone else, feel free to ignore. |
|
[NON-BLOCKING] Packit jobs failed. @containers/packit-build please check. Everyone else, feel free to ignore. |
|
[NON-BLOCKING] Packit jobs failed. @containers/packit-build please check. Everyone else, feel free to ignore. |
lsm5
added
No New Tests
|
@LecrisUT change itself looks good, but over here it would be preferable to add a separate set of jobs in .packit.yaml and have some github IDs included in failure notifications, like what's done for cockpit revdep tests. @containers/podman-maintainers PTAL, wdyt? This is another set of revdep tests, this time for TMT project itself. |
I'd say no need to include podman-next repo in the additional job if it keeps things simpler for now. We're already catching crun and container-selinux issues in those projects. |
|
This would fall under the same rules as the cockpit tests, packit is non blocking for us so we won't gate merges on this and most maintainers will not lock at these failures as they fail to often for unrelated reasons. |
|
A friendly reminder that this PR had no activity for 30 days. |
|
Can you rebase and squash the commits, it seems kinda pointless history wise to add a file just move it it in the next commit. Once done I am fine merging as long as it is clear that podman may not block on these tests |
See: - teemtee/tmt#4047 - teemtee/tmt#4026 Signed-off-by: Cristian Le <[email protected]>
LecrisUT
force-pushed
the
tmt-integration
branch
from
88f2fb2 to
01f1d1e
Compare
openshift-ci
bot
added
the
approved
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: LecrisUT, lsm5, Luap99 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 |
|
/cherrypick v5.7 |
|
@lsm5: once the present PR merges, I will cherry-pick it on top of In response to this:
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. |
openshift-merge-bot
bot
merged commit 14dee39
into
containers:main
|
@lsm5: new pull request created: #27433 In response to this:
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. |
6 participants
See:
podmanfriends integration plan in relevant repos teemtee/tmt#4047An alternative design is to add the tests in
.packit.yaml. Let me know which approach would be preferred. I don't quite follow the steps you do withpodman-next*.repo, maybe we could look into that as well?(should use only one PR where we discuss and test these)