Skip to content

[technial-addons] general enhancements to addon packaging framework #6219

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

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
May 16, 2025

Conversation

hughesjj
Copy link
Contributor

Makes addon generation more generic, adds more tests, and allows for multiple addons to be included in splunk startup

Copy link

codecov bot commented May 14, 2025

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 44.36%. Comparing base (b6207e2) to head (52707af).
Report is 3 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #6219      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   44.41%   44.36%   -0.05%     
==========================================
  Files         390      390              
  Lines       26986    26986              
==========================================
- Hits        11985    11973      -12     
- Misses      14158    14167       +9     
- Partials      843      846       +3     

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

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
  • 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

@hughesjj hughesjj force-pushed the ta-framework-refactor-enhancements branch 8 times, most recently from 1a58614 to 52bddca Compare May 14, 2025 22:24
Base automatically changed from rename_sourcedir to main May 14, 2025 23:39
multiple addons to be included in splunk startup
@hughesjj hughesjj force-pushed the ta-framework-refactor-enhancements branch from 52bddca to e697345 Compare May 14, 2025 23:42
@hughesjj hughesjj marked this pull request as ready for review May 14, 2025 23:42
@hughesjj hughesjj requested review from a team as code owners May 14, 2025 23:42
splunkStartURL := strings.Join(addonNames, ",")
t.Logf("Splunk start url: %s", splunkStartURL)
req := testcontainers.ContainerRequest{
Image: "splunk/splunk:9.4.1",
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Can you try to get this image reference in a location where CI/CD or dependabot can update it over time?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'll just switch to latest

@jvoravong
Copy link
Contributor

Nit: In the future, consider reviewing and updating the usage of Go caches in the TA workflows. Some logs suggest we are writing to the Go cache during action runs but not consistently reading or utilizing the cache entries where possible. While not a blocker for these changes, keeping the runtime for these workflows lower helps everyone.

Log References:
https://github.com/signalfx/splunk-otel-collector/actions/runs/15033274008/job/42250150942?pr=6219#step:4:20
https://github.com/signalfx/splunk-otel-collector/actions/runs/15033274008/job/42250151098?pr=6219#step:5:8
https://github.com/signalfx/splunk-otel-collector/actions/runs/15033274008/job/42250531254?pr=6219#step:4:22

Copy link
Contributor

@jvoravong jvoravong left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

A couple nits. LGTM.

@hughesjj hughesjj merged commit 5d4fe6b into main May 16, 2025
71 checks passed
@hughesjj hughesjj deleted the ta-framework-refactor-enhancements branch May 16, 2025 06:54
@github-actions github-actions bot locked and limited conversation to collaborators May 16, 2025
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants