Skip to content

Conversation

@m1kola
Copy link
Member

@m1kola m1kola commented Oct 5, 2023

Description

Closes #396

Reviewer Checklist

  • API Go Documentation
  • Tests: Unit Tests (and E2E Tests, if appropriate)
  • Comprehensive Commit Messages
  • Links to related GitHub Issue(s)

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. label Oct 5, 2023
@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Oct 5, 2023

Codecov Report

All modified lines are covered by tests ✅

Comparison is base (6808a50) 84.00% compared to head (60c3c1b) 84.00%.

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main     #439   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   84.00%   84.00%           
=======================================
  Files          23       23           
  Lines         844      844           
=======================================
  Hits          709      709           
  Misses         93       93           
  Partials       42       42           
Flag Coverage Δ
e2e 66.11% <ø> (ø)
unit 76.77% <ø> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Files Coverage Δ
api/v1alpha1/operator_types.go 100.00% <ø> (ø)

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@m1kola m1kola marked this pull request as ready for review October 5, 2023 13:26
@m1kola m1kola requested a review from a team as a code owner October 5, 2023 13:26
@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot removed the do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. label Oct 5, 2023
@m1kola m1kola added this pull request to the merge queue Oct 6, 2023
Merged via the queue into operator-framework:main with commit 65bfc69 Oct 6, 2023
LalatenduMohanty pushed a commit to LalatenduMohanty/operator-controller that referenced this pull request Dec 19, 2024
…er. (operator-framework#439)

In addition, there are some new waits introduced to give some more signal around some (very) intermittent install failures from the install script.

This script now completely eschews installation via locally-defined resources and relies entirely on the latest release's scripts/manifests to install on the local cluster, so that we have fewer scripts to maintain.

Signed-off-by: Jordan Keister <[email protected]>
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.

Update Operator CRD with UpgradeConstraintPolicy field

2 participants