Skip to content

Conversation

theishshah
Copy link

Add field for time stamp in scorecard results

Ish Shah added 2 commits July 6, 2021 15:08
Signed-off-by: Ish Shah <ishah@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Ish Shah <ishah@redhat.com>
@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot requested review from dinhxuanvu and joelanford July 7, 2021 19:30
Copy link
Member

@joelanford joelanford left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Is there some context for the addition of this field that explains what it will be used for?

A few questions in the meantime:

  1. What is this the timestamp of? When the test was launched, when it completed, something else?
  2. Depending on the answer to 1), I'm wondering if it makes more sense to be in the TestStatus or TestResult struct?

// Test specifies a single test run.
type Test struct {
metav1.TypeMeta `json:",inline"`
Tstamp string `json:"tstamp,omitempty"`
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Is it possible to use metav1.Time instead of a string?

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We can use a time object and convert to a string later when it's needed. I wanted to add this field because Xunit output's would like a timestamp on the test result.

  1. Current plan is to time stamp upon the creation of the result
  2. Seems reasonable to move it to the result struct instead

Signed-off-by: Ish Shah <ishah@redhat.com>
@theishshah
Copy link
Author

Updated to move timestamp to the result struct and changed type to metav1.Time.

Ish Shah and others added 2 commits July 27, 2021 08:26
Co-authored-by: Joe Lanford <joe.lanford@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Ish Shah <ishah@redhat.com>
Copy link
Member

@jmrodri jmrodri left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

/lgtm

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Sep 2, 2021
Copy link
Member

@joelanford joelanford left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

/approve

/hold
In case you want to fix the typo. If you need this to merge ASAP, feel free to just cancel the hold.

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. label Sep 2, 2021
@openshift-ci
Copy link

openshift-ci bot commented Sep 2, 2021

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: joelanford, theishshah

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 /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Sep 2, 2021
Co-authored-by: Joe Lanford <joe.lanford@gmail.com>
@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot removed the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Sep 2, 2021
@theishshah
Copy link
Author

/unhold

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot removed the do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. label Sep 2, 2021
@jmrodri
Copy link
Member

jmrodri commented Sep 2, 2021

/lgtm

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Sep 2, 2021
@openshift-merge-robot openshift-merge-robot merged commit 7d591ff into operator-framework:master Sep 2, 2021
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants