-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.6k
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
Add integration testing and example for skipBuildDependencies option #1368
Add integration testing and example for skipBuildDependencies option #1368
Conversation
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #1368 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 47.91% 47.91%
=======================================
Files 144 144
Lines 6499 6499
=======================================
Hits 3114 3114
Misses 3101 3101
Partials 284 284
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
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.
Thank you for the contribution, can you change the examples only under the integration
folder? The examples in the root folder are for the latest released version for compatibility reasons.
integration/examples/helm-deployment-dependencies/skaffold.yaml
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
…dependencies/skaffold.yaml Co-Authored-By: pscarey <pscarey@users.noreply.github.com>
once you rebase the docs LGTM |
…dependencies/skaffold.yaml Co-Authored-By: pscarey <pscarey@users.noreply.github.com>
So there's good news and bad news. 👍 The good news is that everyone that needs to sign a CLA (the pull request submitter and all commit authors) have done so. Everything is all good there. 😕 The bad news is that it appears that one or more commits were authored or co-authored by someone other than the pull request submitter. We need to confirm that all authors are ok with their commits being contributed to this project. Please have them confirm that here in the pull request. Note to project maintainer: This is a terminal state, meaning the |
sorry, looks like you need one more rebase 😨 send a ping once you do and we'll get this merged so you don't have to keep fighting with it. also, once you get #1371 ping us there as well so we can get that reviewed/merged ASAP |
pkg/skaffold/deploy/helm.go
Outdated
@@ -161,7 +161,7 @@ func (h *HelmDeployer) deployRelease(ctx context.Context, out io.Writer, r lates | |||
// Dependency builds should be skipped when trying to install a chart | |||
// with local dependencies in the chart folder, e.g. the istio helm chart. | |||
// This decision is left to the user. | |||
if !r.SkipBuildDependencies { |
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.
we should do renames only if it's really necessary - I feel like the benefit here is marginal - even though I understand where you're coming from. Do you mind reverting this?
In order to merge this in before next release (next week) we need:
I'm happy to add this @pscarey if you are okay with that. |
Thanks @balopat I've updated the branch to the latest master and removed the v1beta4 change, and updated the schemas for tests to pass. The rename was actually fixing a mistake when I reverted the name to my first draft. The original comment in this PR refers to the option as 'skipDependencyBuild'. In commit 2acb227 I accidentally rolled this back to my first draft of 'skipBuildDependencies', so I corrected it back to 'skipDependencyBuild' in 4e23a49. Please let me know if there's anything else you require. Keen to start using this shortly at work, pending the other PR. Hopefully that can be simpler. |
You can already use an option for skip dependencies since #1254 was merged and release with 0.22 (https://github.com/GoogleContainerTools/skaffold/releases/tag/v0.22.0) |
Ah, that's where the naming confusion has come from. This PR then only includes an integration example over that (+ currently, the re-name). Please let me know if you want the PR re-named + integration example to be merged, or alternatively just close the PR. R.E. usage, we need #1371, which I can now update off the current master & can be looked at again. |
There is value in the integration example - but please revert the rename - I think that the value there is outweighed by the noise it creates during upgrades. |
Rename has been reverted. Related PR has been separated out from this to work against the current master. Only other change made was that to pass tests, the integrations example had to also be added to the root examples folder, contrary to the previous request by @balopat
|
Fixes #1346
Currently, it is not possible to deploy a
helm
chart with the following structure:The
helm dep build
call breaks on charts following this structure, despite the chart being valid for deployment withhelm install
andhelm upgrade
.A key production example of this is the
istio
helm chart, found here.This pull request fixes this issue with a
skipDependencyBuild
option forhelm
releases (which skips thehelm dep build
phase) and includes documentation, an example (based off the existing helm example) and adds a new test for the validity of theskipDependencyBuild
option.