Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? # for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “#”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? # to your account

Tracking Issue - e2e Conformance Fixes & Enhancements #27

Closed
timothysc opened this issue Oct 25, 2017 · 7 comments
Closed

Tracking Issue - e2e Conformance Fixes & Enhancements #27

timothysc opened this issue Oct 25, 2017 · 7 comments

Comments

@timothysc
Copy link
Member

This issue exists as a tracking reference for the community to reference on issues related to upstream changes to the e2e tests needed for the conformance effort(s).

e2e: Internet connection test should not rely on ICMP achievement

ThirdParty resource e2e test should not be marked as conformance

@WilliamDenniss
Copy link
Member

WilliamDenniss commented Oct 27, 2017

Remove hostname label condition in SchedulerPredicates

1.8 kubernetes/kubernetes#49253
1.7 kubernetes/kubernetes#54713

@timothysc
Copy link
Member Author

Use in-cluster kubeconfig (Fix in 1.8.3)

kubernetes/kubernetes#53924

@pires
Copy link
Contributor

pires commented Nov 3, 2017

Replace capacity with allocatable to calculate pod resource

1.8 kubernetes/kubernetes#47628
1.7 kubernetes/kubernetes#54587 (released in 1.7.10)

@pires
Copy link
Contributor

pires commented Nov 5, 2017

Scheduler predicates test that may violate DNS label rules

bug: kubernetes/kubernetes#55117
fix PR (master): kubernetes/kubernetes#55119
cherry-pick 1.7.x: kubernetes/kubernetes#55156 (after it's merged, it will need 1.7.11 release)

Will create backport PRs for 1.7.x as soon as the PR for master is reviewed and approved. There's no need to backport for 1.8.x.

@WilliamDenniss
Copy link
Member

Tests make an assumption that the permissions on the /tmp dir have not been altered

fix PR (master): kubernetes/kubernetes#54581

@selfmanagingresource
Copy link

What's the status of this issue? Should we close it out? It seems like all the dependent issues pointed to in the issue have been close/merged.

@timothysc
Copy link
Member Author

Closing, these were done long ago.

# for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? # to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

5 participants