-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 116
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
Fix flaky unit test which check the default operator namespace #1296
Fix flaky unit test which check the default operator namespace #1296
Conversation
We will need to set lint ignore to get linter happy on the below:
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
/lgtm
0f7012c
to
72e5aba
Compare
/test all |
72e5aba
to
22e1e0f
Compare
/test all |
/retest |
/test all |
/test e2e |
@ccojocar: The specified target(s) for
Use In response to this:
Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository. |
/test pull-security-profiles-operator-test-e2e |
This unit test cannot run in parallel because environment variables are global causing random failures. This happens because one test case invalidates the other.
11ddf50
to
3a6c6dc
Compare
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: ccojocar, JAORMX, saschagrunert The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. The pull request process is described here
Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
What type of PR is this?
/kind failing-test
What this PR does / why we need it:
This unit test cannot run in parallel because environment variables are global causing random failures. This happens because one test case invalidates the other.
Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
Does this PR have test?
Special notes for your reviewer:
Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?