Skip to content
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

Reorganize "edit" docs #3456

Open
wants to merge 77 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Reorganize "edit" docs #3456

wants to merge 77 commits into from

Conversation

mtoffl01
Copy link
Contributor

@mtoffl01 mtoffl01 commented Nov 13, 2024

Motivation

Make "edit" docs clearer

Changes

  • Modified edit/README so it functions as a central place/ jumping off point to other docs
  • Created new docs "add-new-test." "enable-test" and "skip-tests" which describe how to do the respective actions
  • Deleted "egg-chicken-changes" doc. Believe the info in the "enable-test" doc covers this
  • Updated the remaining docs to be clearer, more precise, and better catered to a newbie

Workflow

  1. ⚠️ Create your PR as draft ⚠️
  2. Work on you PR until the CI passes (if something not related to your task is failing, you can ignore it)
  3. Mark it as ready for review
    • Test logic is modified? -> Get a review from RFC owner. We're working on refining the codeowners file quickly.
    • Framework is modified, or non obvious usage of it -> get a review from R&P team

🚀 Once your PR is reviewed, you can merge it!

🛟 #apm-shared-testing 🛟

Reviewer checklist

  • If PR title starts with [<language>], double-check that only <language> is impacted by the change
  • No system-tests internal is modified. Otherwise, I have the approval from R&P team
  • CI is green, or failing jobs are not related to this change (and you are 100% sure about this statement)
  • A docker base image is modified?
    • the relevant build-XXX-image label is present
  • A scenario is added (or removed)?

@mtoffl01 mtoffl01 changed the title Reorganize docs Reorganize "edit" docs Nov 14, 2024
Copy link
Contributor

@mabdinur mabdinur left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Overall looks good to me. I think we can merge after all comments have been resolved.

Copy link
Collaborator

@cbeauchesne cbeauchesne left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I didn't finished my review, we'll chat by zoom to discuss around the concpet of parametric vs end-to-end

README.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
README.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
README.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
docs/edit/README.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
Test items are skipped (or not) based on declarations in tests class, using manifest, or @bug/flaky/missing_feature decorators.

This fact implies an [egg-chicken issue](../edit/egg-chicken-changes.md) if you need to work on a feature. A way to handle it is to use the `-F` option :
This fact implies an "[egg-chicken issue]"(../edit/egg-chicken-changes.md)[NOTE] if you need to work on a feature. A way to handle it is to use the `-F` option :
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@cbeauchesne calling this out because I deleted the egg-chicken-changes doc. I moved info about how to approach the "chicken or the egg" problem to the enable-test doc. I could link it here instead, but to be honest I don't know what this force-execute doc is referring to and whether it's relevant? 🤔

@mtoffl01 mtoffl01 marked this pull request as ready for review November 15, 2024 17:15
@mtoffl01 mtoffl01 requested a review from a team as a code owner November 15, 2024 17:15
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants