Dennis-Mircea opened a new pull request, #1094:
URL: https://github.com/apache/flink-kubernetes-operator/pull/1094
<!--
*Thank you very much for contributing to the Apache Flink Kubernetes
Operator - we are happy that you want to help us improve the project. To help
the community review your contribution in the best possible way, please go
through the checklist below, which will get the contribution into a shape in
which it can be best reviewed.*
## Contribution Checklist
- Make sure that the pull request corresponds to a [JIRA
issue](https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/FLINK/issues). Exceptions are
made for typos in JavaDoc or documentation files, which need no JIRA issue.
- Name the pull request in the form "[FLINK-XXXX] [component] Title of the
pull request", where *FLINK-XXXX* should be replaced by the actual issue
number. Skip *component* if you are unsure about which is the best component.
Typo fixes that have no associated JIRA issue should be named following
this pattern: `[hotfix][docs] Fix typo in event time introduction` or
`[hotfix][javadocs] Expand JavaDoc for PuncuatedWatermarkGenerator`.
- Fill out the template below to describe the changes contributed by the
pull request. That will give reviewers the context they need to do the review.
- Make sure that the change passes the automated tests, i.e., `mvn clean
verify` passes. You can read more on how we use GitHub Actions for CI
[here](https://nightlies.apache.org/flink/flink-kubernetes-operator-docs-main/docs/development/guide/#cicd).
- Each pull request should address only one issue, not mix up code from
multiple issues.
- Each commit in the pull request has a meaningful commit message
(including the JIRA id)
- Once all items of the checklist are addressed, remove the above text and
this checklist, leaving only the filled out template below.
**(The sections below can be removed for hotfixes of typos)**
-->
## What is the purpose of the change
This pull request fixes and significantly improves the test coverage for the
`flink-kubernetes-webhook` module.
Prior to this change, the webhook tests were not running at all due to the
parent POM using
`<maven-surefire-plugin.version>3.0.0-M4</maven-surefire-plugin.version>` while
the tests relied on JUnit 5 discovery that was incompatible with the previous
`<surefire-plugin.version>2.22.2</surefire-plugin.version>` configuration.
After fixing the test execution, coverage was improved from ~50% line
coverage to ~90%, and from 7 tests to 105. The `FlinkOperatorWebhook` class was
minimally refactored to be testable (following the same `@VisibleForTesting`
constructor pattern used by `FlinkOperator`), without any behavioral changes.
The coverage before:
<img width="1203" height="208" alt="Pasted Graphic 1"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/6d11ef90-c0cb-43ec-be0f-6dfa5d8e8db2";
/>
The coverage after:
<img width="1210" height="206" alt="Pasted Graphic"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/1005114b-847b-4d80-8e1e-4257b30858c8";
/>
## Brief change log
- Fixed webhook tests not running due to surefire plugin version mismatch
(`2.22.2` vs `3.0.0-M4`)
- Refactored `FlinkOperatorWebhook` to accept `InformerManager` and
`FlinkConfigManager` via a `@VisibleForTesting` constructor, mirroring the
`FlinkOperator` pattern
- Added tests for custom validator/mutator plugin discovery
(`TestValidator`, `TestMutator`) in `FlinkOperatorWebhookTest`
- Added SSL context tests: server startup with a generated PKCS12 keystore
over HTTPS, and error handling when required env vars are missing
- Added coverage for `FlinkValidator`, `FlinkMutator`,
`DefaultRequestMutator`, and `InformerManager`
- Added `surefire.module.config` with `--add-opens` to the webhook
`pom.xml` (consistent with the operator module)
## Verifying this change
This change added tests and can be verified as follows:
- All 105 tests pass via `mvn test -pl flink-kubernetes-webhook`
## Does this pull request potentially affect one of the following parts:
- Dependencies (does it add or upgrade a dependency): no
- The public API, i.e., is any changes to the `CustomResourceDescriptors`:
no
- Core observer or reconciler logic that is regularly executed: no
## Documentation
- Does this pull request introduce a new feature? no
- If yes, how is the feature documented? not applicable
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]
