Improve testing running on GitHub Actions

[itskingori]

Summary

I see an opportunity to improve the tests running GitHub Actions. I would like to start with test part, then I can follow up with the release part.

Improvements

• Add linting test to test workflow
• Add Docker build test to test workflow
• Add code annotations based of using Go test results
• Configure go version in tests from the go.mod file
• Configure go setup cache key from go.sum hash

Reviewing

Follow the commits, each commit is an idea.

Checklist

• Tested and/or added tests to validate that the changes work as intended, if applicable.
• Updated documentation in README.md, if applicable.

References

• https://github.com/actions/setup-go
• https://github.com/golangci/golangci-lint
• https://github.com/golangci/golangci-lint-action
• https://github.com/guyarb/golang-test-annotations

[itskingori]

I see an opportunity to improve the tests running GitHub Actions. I would like to start with test part, then I can follow up with the release part.

My ultimate goal was to update the CI to fix an issue running this tool on ARM based instances i.e.

$ kubectl logs -f pod/k8s-ttl-controller-6897978d46-mmkwc -n addons
exec /k8s-ttl-controller: exec format error

I should have probably started with filing an issue to check if you're accepting PRs (or confirm scope of the work). Since, this is a blocking issue, so I'll close and package it on my own as Intellection/docker-k8s-ttl-controller.

[TwiN]

fix an issue running this tool on ARM based instances

There is a docker image for ARM btw

k8s-ttl-controller/.github/workflows/publish-release.yml

Line 29 in 054dde7

platforms: linux/amd64,linux/arm64

[itskingori]

I know, and I tried using it at first but it doesn't work ... and the error it gives the hint that it's architecture related.

$ kubectl describe deployment.apps/k8s-ttl-controller -n addons
Name:                   k8s-ttl-controller
Namespace:              addons
CreationTimestamp:      Tue, 19 Nov 2024 16:50:50 +0200
Labels:                 app=k8s-ttl-controller
Annotations:            deployment.kubernetes.io/revision: 3
Selector:               app=k8s-ttl-controller
Replicas:               1 desired | 1 updated | 1 total | 0 available | 1 unavailable
StrategyType:           RollingUpdate
MinReadySeconds:        0
RollingUpdateStrategy:  25% max unavailable, 25% max surge
Pod Template:
  Labels:           app=k8s-ttl-controller
  Service Account:  k8s-ttl-controller
  Containers:
   k8s-ttl-controller:
    Image:      ghcr.io/twin/k8s-ttl-controller:v1.2.0
    Port:       <none>
    Host Port:  <none>
    Limits:
      cpu:     32m
      memory:  256Mi
    Requests:
      cpu:        16m
      memory:     128Mi
    Environment:  <none>
    Mounts:       <none>
  Volumes:        <none>
Conditions:
  Type           Status  Reason
  ----           ------  ------
  Progressing    True    NewReplicaSetAvailable
  Available      False   MinimumReplicasUnavailable
OldReplicaSets:  k8s-ttl-controller-6c494f67cb (0/0 replicas created), k8s-ttl-controller-7fdbdfbccb (0/0 replicas created)
NewReplicaSet:   k8s-ttl-controller-6d679ffddb (1/1 replicas created)
Events:
  Type    Reason             Age    From                   Message
  ----    ------             ----   ----                   -------
  Normal  ScalingReplicaSet  18s    deployment-controller  Scaled up replica set k8s-ttl-controller-6d679ffddb to 1 from 0

$ kubectl get Deployment,Pod -l app=k8s-ttl-controller -n addons
NAME                                 READY   UP-TO-DATE   AVAILABLE   AGE
deployment.apps/k8s-ttl-controller   0/1     1            0           13h

NAME                                      READY   STATUS   RESTARTS      AGE
pod/k8s-ttl-controller-6d679ffddb-2sn4w   0/1     Error    3 (29s ago)   49s

$ kubectl logs -f pod/k8s-ttl-controller-6d679ffddb-2sn4w -n addons
exec /k8s-ttl-controller: exec format error

[itskingori]

Figured I'd submit improvements piece by piece, starting with the tests ... as I think there's something wrong with the ARM release. Tried to inspect your image and you can see I can't even tell what arch's are available ...

$ docker buildx imagetools inspect ghcr.io/twin/k8s-ttl-controller:v1.2.0
Name:      ghcr.io/twin/k8s-ttl-controller:v1.2.0
MediaType: application/vnd.docker.distribution.manifest.v2+json
Digest:    sha256:d9ec4b5576d7a6e0c2f72b28a627a88548e3ea86729f7d0bb42d15eca7f3ad7f

$ docker buildx imagetools inspect zappi/k8s-ttl-controller:1.3.1
Name:      docker.io/zappi/k8s-ttl-controller:1.3.1
MediaType: application/vnd.oci.image.index.v1+json
Digest:    sha256:cbbde6760caaebabc2ef6c3491effc86619718b04380c9c610557382589ed752

Manifests:
  Name:        docker.io/zappi/k8s-ttl-controller:1.3.1@sha256:76792844b28dbfec4f38e64c33dcff5d82f52634dca9d44e9c99dc216e256d5b
  MediaType:   application/vnd.oci.image.manifest.v1+json
  Platform:    linux/amd64

  Name:        docker.io/zappi/k8s-ttl-controller:1.3.1@sha256:f4116c85bb350eb4af0e2172b00078bfd9714dac64e69ebcb7f8826aedf4f468
  MediaType:   application/vnd.oci.image.manifest.v1+json
  Platform:    linux/arm64

  Name:        docker.io/zappi/k8s-ttl-controller:1.3.1@sha256:ff61d998d99fd8f034d13e1fb5f986e0e9f7784ba5327cc53fbf2a9af4ce4b53
  MediaType:   application/vnd.oci.image.manifest.v1+json
  Platform:    unknown/unknown
  Annotations:
    vnd.docker.reference.digest: sha256:76792844b28dbfec4f38e64c33dcff5d82f52634dca9d44e9c99dc216e256d5b
    vnd.docker.reference.type:   attestation-manifest

  Name:        docker.io/zappi/k8s-ttl-controller:1.3.1@sha256:29c47952bc16678763f371a49357e2f8d74049f547c7c24297d2e11e2bec67ab
  MediaType:   application/vnd.oci.image.manifest.v1+json
  Platform:    unknown/unknown
  Annotations:
    vnd.docker.reference.type:   attestation-manifest
    vnd.docker.reference.digest: sha256:f4116c85bb350eb4af0e2172b00078bfd9714dac64e69ebcb7f8826aedf4f468

[itskingori]

Feel free to have a look at the workflows in Intellection/docker-k8s-ttl-controller (and copy if you want, MIT licensed), they pretty much check out the code here and do what I was aiming to do in totality. The exception being I prefer to publish to Docker Hub ... here, had I aimed to publish to both, which is possible.