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.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We鈥檒l occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

chore: migrate from kuttl to chainsaw #1406

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Feb 13, 2024
Merged

Conversation

eddycharly
Copy link
Contributor

@eddycharly eddycharly commented Feb 8, 2024

Migrate from kuttl to chainsaw.

If you need more infos 馃憞

Signed-off-by: Charles-Edouard Br茅t茅ch茅 <charles.edouard@nirmata.com>
@CLAassistant
Copy link

CLAassistant commented Feb 8, 2024

CLA assistant check
All committers have signed the CLA.

@NissesSenap
Copy link
Collaborator

First, thanks for your PR @eddycharly , I see that you have been racing through the CNCF community to help other projects with the same migration :)

To give some context to this PR, you can see similar PRs at:

keptn/lifecycle-toolkit#3000
operator-framework/operator-sdk#6676
grafana/tempo-operator#786 in this PR the tempo-operator maintainers asked some good questions and @eddycharly explained the current status, that I suggest taking a look at.

Sadly, kuttl haven't done a release since jan 2023.

Here you can find a good video showcasing chainsaw: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ejof-wtAdQM&ab_channel=CamilaMacedo

To me, it makes sense to merge this since not much is happening in kuttl, and we can at least give this a try. Hopefully chaninsaw will be supported for a long time and ideally operator-sdk would also adopt it.
In my mind, we have nothing to lose by merging this.

  • I got to say I do like the test steps more in chainsaw.

@eddycharly
Copy link
Contributor Author

Thanks @NissesSenap !

Helping Keptn folks and other projects adopting chainsaw has been incredibly valuable for us, we discovered new use cases that really deserve new features.

There are things kuttl will never solve, by design, like partial array comparisons or even simple things like replicas >= 3.

That would be awesome to collaborate with the grafana operator project, i'm sure both projects will benefit a lot from each other :)

@eddycharly
Copy link
Contributor Author

@NissesSenap @HubertStefanski what do you think about merging this ?

I could dig in the issues and start adding a couple e2e tests for issues where we have manifests provided.

@NissesSenap
Copy link
Collaborator

We have our weekly meeting tomorrow, and we will bring it up then @eddycharly , but I would be surprised if we don't merge it as is.

@eddycharly
Copy link
Contributor Author

We have our weekly meeting tomorrow, and we will bring it up then @eddycharly , but I would be surprised if we don't merge it as is.

Awesome ! Is the meeting public or internal ? Would be happy to join if it's public.

@NissesSenap
Copy link
Collaborator

Sadly, it's still private. It's on our TODO to setup a public meeting.

It's a 13:30 CET today (I know the time is tight), but feel free to reach out in the grafana-operator slack in Kubernetes https://kubernetes.slack.com/archives/C019A1KTYKC and I will DM you and send an invite.

@pb82 pb82 enabled auto-merge February 13, 2024 12:52
@pb82 pb82 merged commit 513238e into grafana:master Feb 13, 2024
10 checks passed
@eddycharly eddycharly deleted the chainsaw branch February 13, 2024 12:55
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

5 participants