-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 480
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
test: improve GatewayWithAttachedRoutes conformance test #3169
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
test: improve GatewayWithAttachedRoutes conformance test #3169
Conversation
Skipping CI for Draft Pull Request. |
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: mlavacca 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 |
Signed-off-by: Mattia Lavacca <[email protected]>
b470a94
to
5579e38
Compare
@mlavacca: The following test failed, say
Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard. Please help us cut down on flakes by linking to an open issue when you hit one in your PR. 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-sigs/prow repository. I understand the commands that are listed here. |
The Kubernetes project currently lacks enough active contributors to adequately respond to all PRs. This bot triages PRs according to the following rules:
You can:
Please send feedback to sig-contributor-experience at kubernetes/community. /lifecycle rotten |
What type of PR is this?
/kind test
/area conformance
What this PR does / why we need it:
The GatewayWithAttachedRoutes conformance test has been improved such that when a route references a non-existing listener in a Gateway through the
SectionName
, the number ofAttachedRoutes
does not get incremented.Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
Fixes #
Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?: