pkg/karmadactl: unit test join #5871
Conversation
In this commit, we unit test the process of joining a cluster to the Karmada control plane. The tests validate the arguments passed to the join cluster operation and ensure the creation of the new cluster runtime object. Additionally, we verify that the necessary access secrets for the new cluster in push mode are correctly generated in the Karmada control plane. Signed-off-by: Mohamed Awnallah <[email protected]>
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.
Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
karmada-bot
added
the
size/L
|
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
❗ Your organization needs to install the Codecov GitHub app to enable full functionality. Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #5871 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 46.32% 46.61% +0.29%
==========================================
Files 661 663 +2
Lines 54400 54586 +186
==========================================
+ Hits 25200 25446 +246
+ Misses 27576 27463 -113
- Partials 1624 1677 +53
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. 🚨 Try these New Features:
|
| var controlPlaneKubeClientBuilder = func(controlPlaneRestConfig *rest.Config) kubeclient.Interface { | ||
| return kubeclient.NewForConfigOrDie(controlPlaneRestConfig) | ||
| } | ||
| var karmadaClientBuilder = func(controlPlaneRestConfig *rest.Config) karmadaclientset.Interface { | ||
| return karmadaclientset.NewForConfigOrDie(controlPlaneRestConfig) | ||
| } | ||
| var clusterKubeClientBuilder = func(clusterConfig *rest.Config) kubeclient.Interface { | ||
| return kubeclient.NewForConfigOrDie(clusterConfig) | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The implementation of controlPlaneKubeClientBuilder is the same as that of clusterKubeClientBuilder.
| wantErr bool | ||
| errMsg string | ||
| }{ | ||
| { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I run this case failed on my local side:
=== RUN TestRunJoinCluster/RunJoinCluster_ObtainClusterID_FailedToObtainClusterID
join_test.go:212: expected error message connection refused to be in the server could not find the requested resource (get namespaces kube-system)
--- FAIL: TestRunJoinCluster/RunJoinCluster_ObtainClusterID_FailedToObtainClusterID (0.02s)
| } | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| func TestRunJoinCluster(t *testing.T) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
After what's happened, it's probably not our intention to introduce such complex tests, and maybe we're not dealing with such difficult-to-test methods. What do you think?
Description
In this commit, we unit test the process of joining a cluster to the Karmada control plane. The tests validate the arguments passed to the join cluster operation and ensure the creation of the new cluster runtime object. Additionally, we verify that the necessary access secrets for the new cluster in push mode are correctly generated in the Karmada control plane.
What type of PR is this?
Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
Part of #5491.
Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?: