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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

test(e2e): only run kube max version on old e2e tests (backport of #11915) #11932

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

test(e2e): only run kube max version on old e2e tests (backport of #11915) #11932

wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

kumahq[bot]
Copy link
Contributor

@kumahq kumahq bot commented Oct 30, 2024

Automatic cherry-pick of #11915 for branch release-2.5

Generated by action

cherry-picked commit c73e0b1
⚠️ ⚠️ ⚠️ Conflicts happened when cherry-picking! ⚠️ ⚠️ ⚠️

On branch release-2.5
Your branch is up to date with 'origin/release-2.5'.

You are currently cherry-picking commit c73e0b141.
  (fix conflicts and run "git cherry-pick --continue")
  (use "git cherry-pick --skip" to skip this patch)
  (use "git cherry-pick --abort" to cancel the cherry-pick operation)

Unmerged paths:
  (use "git add/rm <file>..." as appropriate to mark resolution)
	deleted by us:   .github/workflows/_test.yaml

no changes added to commit (use "git add" and/or "git commit -a")

@jakubdyszkiewicz @kumahq
test(e2e): only run kube max version on old e2e tests (#11915)
52c5a8f 
I don't see good reason to run old e2e tests with min version of kube or
ipv6.
We test 90% in the shared `e2e_env`, but old tests spawns 12 VMs (as
much as all variants of new tests) and runs longer than them.
I see minimal risk of not running those tests with IPV6 and old kube and
huge win for CI time.

Signed-off-by: Jakub Dyszkiewicz <[email protected]>
@kumahq kumahq bot requested a review from a team as a code owner October 30, 2024 13:45
@kumahq kumahq bot requested review from jakubdyszkiewicz and Automaat and removed request for a team October 30, 2024 13:45
@jakubdyszkiewicz
Copy link
Contributor

not related

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@jakubdyszkiewicz jakubdyszkiewicz Awaiting requested review from jakubdyszkiewicz jakubdyszkiewicz is a code owner automatically assigned from kumahq/kuma-maintainers

@Automaat Automaat Awaiting requested review from Automaat Automaat is a code owner automatically assigned from kumahq/kuma-maintainers

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
conflict release-2.5
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
1 participant
@jakubdyszkiewicz