-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 137
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
Refactored Tink Worker #596
Conversation
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #596 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 43.41% 45.66% +2.24%
==========================================
Files 51 52 +1
Lines 3107 3147 +40
==========================================
+ Hits 1349 1437 +88
+ Misses 1673 1624 -49
- Partials 85 86 +1
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
6a3a391
to
43c3fed
Compare
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.
Looks really good, thanks for the work. I've only got minor issue with a few things, please see the comments.
43c3fed
to
70409cd
Compare
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.
looks like the only hang up is the logger := log.Test
calls should be inside the t.Run
to be most effective. 🤔 not even sure what would happen if child test were to fail, pretty sure the logs will still get printed but it'd also include the successful sibling tests too
70409cd
to
93110e8
Compare
@mmlb Fixed logger initialization |
93110e8
to
5d25a11
Compare
b685e4d
to
2b38d71
Compare
@mmlb anything else on this? |
f5a14df
to
f8617f6
Compare
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.
Fantastic, thanks for the additional testing !
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.
lgtm, just the one comment about the public strings that seem unnecessary.
f8617f6
to
2b38d71
Compare
* Create ContainerManager and LogCapturer abstractions * Add tests for new interfaces * Clean up worker method arguments Signed-off-by: Micah Hausler <mhausler@amazon.com>
2b38d71
to
5eb8c9b
Compare
I'm a maintainer of several other services often related to the Kuberenetes back-end/Kubernetes controllers and I'm taking ownership for a lot of release synchronization making it both appropriate and necessary for me to maintain aspects of the Tink repository. Requirements: - I have reviewed the [community membership guidelines](https://github.com/tinkerbell/proposals/blob/main/proposals/0024/GOVERNANCE.md) - I have [enabled 2FA on my GitHub account](https://github.com/settings/security) - I have subscribed to the [tinkerbell-contributors e-mail list](https://groups.google.com/g/tinkerbell-contributors) - I am actively contributing to 1 or more Tinkerbell subprojects Here is a list of non-trival PRs I have been the primary reviewer on: #596 #628 #614 I have also made a number of code contributions to this repository, here are a few of them: #638 #631 #626 #622 #612 I have also raised various issues and am driving the releasing across Tinkerbell including in this repository. Requesting consideration of expedited responsibilities: yes Sponsors: - @mmlb (Maintainer) - @micahhausler (Maintainer) - @jacobweinstock (Core contributor in other Tinkerbell repositories)
Description
ContainerManager
andContainerLogger
abstractionsWorker
struct and initializationWhy is this needed
I was working on #573 and wanted to be able to create a 'virtual worker' with faked-out Docker client calls. This refactor will make it easy immediately test API changes and later refactor the worker logic.
How Has This Been Tested?
How are existing users impacted? What migration steps/scripts do we need?
No impact to existing users
Checklist:
I have: