Merge pull request #9 from juditnovak/big_test

More extended and verbose tests

.github/workflows/ci.yaml

@@ -20,6 +20,11 @@ jobs:
     runs-on: ubuntu-latest
     needs:
       - build
+    strategy:              
+      matrix:
+        include:
+          - snap: "3.1/stable"
+          - snap: "3.1/edge"
     steps:
       - name: Checkout
         uses: actions/checkout@v3
@@ -32,7 +37,7 @@ jobs:
           # This is needed until https://bugs.launchpad.net/juju/+bug/1977582 is fixed
           bootstrap-options: "--agent-version 3.1.5"
           bootstrap-constraints: "cores=2 mem=2G"
-          juju-channel: "3.1/stable"  
+          juju-channel: ${{ matrix.snap }}
       - name: Download packed charm(s)
         uses: actions/download-artifact@v3
         with:
@@ -41,6 +46,8 @@ jobs:
         run: tox run -e integration -- --model testing
         env:
           CI_PACKED_CHARMS: ${{ needs.build.outputs.charms }}
+      - name: Print logs
+        run: juju switch testing; juju debug-log --replay --no-tail
       - name: Dump logs
         uses: canonical/charm-logdump-action@main
         if: failure()

README.md

@@ -12,25 +12,50 @@ Use links instead.
 
 Small demonstration of the unexpected beahvior observed when multiple changes (deletion) are applied on a multi-pack secret of a charm within the smae event context. 
 
-## Issue
 
-Demonstration of the issue is visible in the correpsonding [Integration Test](tests/integration/test_charm.py) -- run successfully by the corresponding pipeline.
+## Description
 
+Demonstration of the issue is visible in the correpsonding [Integration Test](tests/integration/test_charm.py).
+
+NOTE: These tests are representing BROKEN behavior.
+
+Running green means that the feature is still broken.
+
+
+## How to use
+
+Pipelines are equipped to run both on Juju 3.1. `edge` and `stable` releases.
+
+Whenever a new Juju 3.1. `stable`/`edge` release may be out, you just have to re-run the pipelines to verify if previous issues still may hold.
+
+NOTE: You would want to see ALL tests to FAIL (except the first one marked in the docstring as functional). That means that issues listed here are fully fixed.
+
+
+## Pipelines
+
+The demo is equipped with verbose pipelines, printing expected results vs. actual ones.
+
+Furthermore, all `juju debug-logs` are also listed after each test run (in case curiousity about the details).
+
+An example of how the demo is showing broken behavior:
+
+```
+for i in range(3):
+    await helper_execute_action(ops_test, "set-secret", {"key": f"key{i}", "value": f"value{i}"})
+await helper_execute_action(ops_test, "delete-secrets", {"keys": ["key{i}" for i in range(3)]})
+secrets_data = await helper_execute_action(ops_test, "get-secrets")
+
+# ISSUE: This is NOT the intuitively expected behavior
+assert secrets_data.get("secrets") == {"key2": "value2", "key3": "value3"}
 ```
-async def test_delete_secrets_within_the_same_action_scope(ops_test: OpsTest):
-    """Testing if it's possible to remove a secret from a joined secret removing one-by-one within the same event scope.
 
-    NOTE: This should fail
-    """
-    await helper_execute_action(ops_test, "set-secret", {"key": "key1", "value": "value1"})
-    await helper_execute_action(ops_test, "set-secret", {"key": "key2", "value": "value2"})
-    await helper_execute_action(ops_test, "set-secret", {"key": "key3", "value": "value3"})
 
-    await helper_execute_action(ops_test, "delete-secrets", {"keys": ["key1", "key2", "key3"]})
+## Juju Secret issues
+
+At the time of creating the demo, major issues are typically as such:
+multiple manipulations within the same event scope applied on a multi-value secret object are not working as expected.
 
-    secrets_data = await helper_execute_action(ops_test, "get-secrets")
+Typically for example when there's an attempt to remove multiple keys from a joined secret -- it's only the first action taking effect.
+(Occasionally it's the first and the last action taking effect.)
 
-    #   
-    # ISSUE: This is NOT the intuitively expected behavior
-    #   
-    assert secrets_data.get("secrets") == {"key2": "value2", "key3": "value3"}
+Similar problems were observed on setting a secret value within a joined secret.

actions.yaml

@@ -3,12 +3,9 @@ forget-all-secrets:
 
 set-secret:
   description: Test action to set a secret key/value pair.
-  key:
-    type: string
-    description: The key for the secret
-  value:
-    type: string
-    description: The value for the secret
+  content:
+    type: dict
+    description: The content for the secret
 
 get-secrets:
   description: Retrieve all the secrets stored in juju storage.

src/charm.py

@@ -43,8 +43,8 @@ def _on_start(self, event) -> None:
         self.unit.status = ActiveStatus()
 
     def _on_set_secret_action(self, event: ActionEvent):
-        key, value = event.params.get("key"), event.params.get("value")
-        event.set_results({"secret-id": self.set_secret(key, value)})
+        content = event.params
+        event.set_results({"secret-id": self.set_secret(content)})
 
     def _on_get_secrets_action(self, event: ActionEvent):
         """Return the secrets stored in juju secrets backend."""
@@ -58,7 +58,7 @@ def _on_delete_secrets_action(self, event: ActionEvent):
     def _on_pseudo_delete_secrets_action(self, event: ActionEvent):
         keys = event.params.get("keys")
         for key in keys:
-            self.set_secret(key, "### DELETED ###")
+            self.set_secret({key: "### DELETED ###"})
 
     def _on_forget_all_secrets_action(self, event: ActionEvent):
         if self.app_peer_data.get("secret-id"):
@@ -92,26 +92,20 @@ def get_secrets(self) -> dict[str, str]:
         logger.info(f"Retrieved secret {secret_id} with content {content}")
         return content
 
-    def set_secret(self, key: str, value: str) -> None:
+    def set_secret(self, new_content: dict) -> None:
         """Set the secret in the juju secret storage."""
-        if not value:
-            return self.delete_secret(key)
-
         secret_id = self.app_peer_data.get("secret-id")
 
         if secret_id:
             secret = self.model.get_secret(id=secret_id)
             content = secret.get_content()
-            content.update({key: value})
+            content.update(new_content)
             logger.info(f"Setting secret {secret.id} to {content}")
             secret.set_content(content)
         else:
-            content = {
-                key: value,
-            }
-            secret = self.app.add_secret(content)
+            secret = self.app.add_secret(new_content)
             self.app_peer_data["secret-id"] = secret.id
-            logger.info(f"Added secret {secret.id} to {content}")
+            logger.info(f"Added secret {secret.id} to {new_content}")
 
         return secret.id