-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 40.3k
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
PodSecurity: make failure integration tests feature-aware #103365
PodSecurity: make failure integration tests feature-aware #103365
Conversation
@liggitt: The label(s) 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. |
/sig auth |
/triage accepted |
449bf67
to
bf5188f
Compare
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
(once you figure out the restore issue)
00bd133
to
4d3d704
Compare
/hold cancel |
/lgtm |
4d3d704
to
00dee9c
Compare
New changes are detected. LGTM label has been removed. |
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: liggitt, tallclair 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 |
fixed import verify error |
/retest |
00dee9c
to
ba6b4c5
Compare
fixed conflict |
New changes are detected. LGTM label has been removed. |
/retest |
#102904 flake |
What type of PR is this?
/kind feature
/kind test
What this PR does / why we need it:
Enables the failure testcases for podsecurity tests to indicate features they depend on (for example, features which must be enabled for data to be persisted in the fields the negative testcase expects to reject).
It also runs the integration tests with only GA features to ensure passing testcases only depend on GA features.
This unblocks adding testcases for procMount (xref #103340 (comment))
Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?
/assign @tallclair