Use "all" integrations to run tests when "all" is used #29517
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
The change apache#29449 made a distinction between "all" and "available" tests and it turned out that "All" test type uses "available" tests. The name "all" is actually wrong now. It should be renamed to be "all-with-tests" or similar, but this should be done in a separate PR
Member
Author
|
cc: @ferruzzi |
jedcunningham
approved these changes
Feb 13, 2023
pierrejeambrun
approved these changes
Feb 13, 2023
Contributor
|
Sorry about that,I didn't run into it in my testing. Is there a gap in the testing I should plug? I'll take renaming the variable in another PR either today or tomorrow. |
Member
Author
No problem. that's a bnit of complexity of commiter vs. non-commiter run. They are optimized differently.
I am just about to create a PR :) |
Contributor
Well fine then 😛 👍 |
potiuk
added a commit
to potiuk/airflow
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 16, 2023
The "all" alias outgrew original meaning with adding statsd integration in apache#29449 which resulted in a problem fixed by apache#29517. The "all" tests as result was not "all" but "all that could be tested". This PR adds "all-testable" alias which as opposed to "all" does not contain "statsd" - it also renames some of the vars/arrays to reflect it.7
potiuk
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 17, 2023
The "all" alias outgrew original meaning with adding statsd integration in #29449 which resulted in a problem fixed by #29517. The "all" tests as result was not "all" but "all that could be tested". This PR adds "all-testable" alias which as opposed to "all" does not contain "statsd" - it also renames some of the vars/arrays to reflect it.7
ephraimbuddy
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 8, 2023
The change #29449 made a distinction between "all" and "available" tests and it turned out that "All" test type uses "available" tests. The name "all" is actually wrong now. It should be renamed to be "all-with-tests" or similar, but this should be done in a separate PR (cherry picked from commit 72c3817)
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
4 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
The change #29449 made a distinction between "all" and "available" tests and it turned out that "All" test type uses "available" tests. The name "all" is actually wrong now. It should be renamed to be "all-with-tests" or similar, but this should be done in a separate PR
^ Add meaningful description above
Read the Pull Request Guidelines for more information.
In case of fundamental code changes, an Airflow Improvement Proposal (AIP) is needed.
In case of a new dependency, check compliance with the ASF 3rd Party License Policy.
In case of backwards incompatible changes please leave a note in a newsfragment file, named
{pr_number}.significant.rstor{issue_number}.significant.rst, in newsfragments.