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.

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 abstraction for testing cos integration #134

Open
rgildein opened this issue Jun 12, 2024 · 0 comments · May be fixed by #135
Open

Add abstraction for testing cos integration #134

rgildein opened this issue Jun 12, 2024 · 0 comments · May be fixed by #135

Comments

@rgildein
Copy link
Contributor

The Kubeflow team does integration with cos for all their charms. As this implementation needs to be tested, the integration with grafana-agent-k8s is sufficient, and these tests are the same for all charms, so it makes sense to implement it in one place.

This was already implemented it into their helper called chisme #98, however after first round of implementation we realized that this can cause an issue with dependencies, since libjuju package is need and chisme is used as reusable code base for many charms. Like this, the libjuju will be part of charms, which brings a lot of unnecessary package to charm + the build process will require some additional packages to build binaries (see my comment here).

For these reason, we think, that this abstraction would be more suitable for a package used only for testing. Of course, the first choice is to go with pytest-operator, since it is standard for any operator charm.

This issue is reported for the purpose of discussion and common decision on how to test the integration with cos, which everyone will eventually do. Perhaps we could create another plugin called pytest-cos that takes advantage of the pytest-operator.

I will push the draft PR with the abstraction to see how it can be used, I will check the integration tests.

@rgildein rgildein linked a pull request Jun 12, 2024 that will close this issue
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

1 participant