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

Add Windows 2025 for unit test steps #42998

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Mar 5, 2025
Merged

Conversation

oakrizan
Copy link
Contributor

@oakrizan oakrizan commented Mar 4, 2025

Proposed commit message

Based on Support Matrix Windows 2025 should be included in 8.17 for filebeat and metricbeat only. Other active branches do not have Windows 2025 support.
Updated Extended Windows unit test group with additional step per beats mentioned above.

Checklist

  • My code follows the style guidelines of this project
  • I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
  • I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
  • I have made corresponding change to the default configuration files
  • I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works
  • I have added an entry in CHANGELOG.next.asciidoc or CHANGELOG-developer.next.asciidoc.

Related issues

Logs

Buildkite builds:
-- filebeat: https://buildkite.com/elastic/filebeat/builds/14161#0195618f-0cb5-4817-aaea-b40d90e895d2
-- metricbeat: https://buildkite.com/elastic/beats-metricbeat/builds/14661#0195618f-0de9-467b-ae6e-ec7ffc2f3ee8

@botelastic botelastic bot added needs_team Indicates that the issue/PR needs a Team:* label and removed needs_team Indicates that the issue/PR needs a Team:* label labels Mar 4, 2025
@oakrizan oakrizan marked this pull request as ready for review March 5, 2025 11:16
@oakrizan oakrizan requested a review from a team as a code owner March 5, 2025 11:16
@oakrizan oakrizan changed the title Add Windows 2025 for unit steps Add Windows 2025 for unit test steps Mar 5, 2025
@oakrizan oakrizan requested review from dliappis, pazone, ev1yehor and v1v March 5, 2025 11:17
Comment on lines +262 to +263
Set-Location -Path filebeat
mage build unitTest
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

As far as I see mage supports running from a directory:

-d
directory to read magefiles from (default "." or "magefiles" if exists)

What's the reason for using Set-Location -Path filebeat instead of mage -d filebeat build unitTest?

Suggested change
Set-Location -Path filebeat
mage build unitTest
mage -d filebeat build unitTest

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This approach was discussed and agreed during the migration, for some beats -d opt produces error, so in sake of consistency we keep it like that

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

cool, do you mind linking the GH issue or PR with the discussion?

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 couldn't find a slack thread or a PR, since it was somewhere in the beginning of 2024. But I recall that this discussion occurred on one of our weekly meetings a year ago.

@@ -271,6 +272,27 @@ steps:
- github_commit_status:
context: "metricbeat: Win 2019 Unit Tests"

- label: ":windows: Metricbeat: Win 2025 Unit Tests"
command: |
Set-Location -Path metricbeat
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

ditto

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Same as in previous comment

Copy link
Member

@v1v v1v left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM, my question is not a blocker but something that can help with the tribal knowledge

@v1v
Copy link
Member

v1v commented Mar 5, 2025

qq, what's the reason this is not a backport?

@oakrizan
Copy link
Contributor Author

oakrizan commented Mar 5, 2025

qq, what's the reason this is not a backport?

As mentioned in a description: Based on Support Matrix Windows 2025 should be included in 8.17 for filebeat and metricbeat only. Other active branches do not have Windows 2025 support.

@oakrizan oakrizan merged commit beba866 into 8.17 Mar 5, 2025
36 checks passed
@oakrizan oakrizan deleted the add-win-2025-unit-test-steps branch March 5, 2025 17:15
@v1v
Copy link
Member

v1v commented Mar 5, 2025

As mentioned in a description: Based on Support Matrix Windows 2025 should be included in 8.17 for filebeat and metricbeat only. Other active branches do not have Windows 2025 support.

Are you saying this is not in 9.0 or main?

As far as I know, we always create PRs in the main branch and backport to the relevant branches. Doing this should be an exception.

I think, 9.0 is not in the matrix support because 9.0.0 has not been released yet, the same applies for 8.18.0, we are in a Feature Freeze.

2025 is a new OS hence I strongly believe it should be in 8.x, 8.18, 9.0 and main. Can you please talk to the product teams and double check if my assumptions are correct?

To avoid any confusion in the future, I'd defer to the backport strategy where we do not contribute to release branches but use PRs into main and the backports. If an exception needs to be considered, it should actually be clear in the description, and somehow agreed beforehand

@v1v
Copy link
Member

v1v commented Mar 5, 2025

You can use @/mergify backport main 9.0 8.18 8.x so mergify should be clever enough to create the backports free. (please replace @/ with @)

@oakrizan
Copy link
Contributor Author

oakrizan commented Mar 5, 2025

@mergify backport 9.0

Copy link
Contributor

mergify bot commented Mar 5, 2025

backport 9.0

✅ Backports have been created

@oakrizan
Copy link
Contributor Author

oakrizan commented Mar 5, 2025

@mergify backport 8.18

Copy link
Contributor

mergify bot commented Mar 5, 2025

backport 8.18

✅ Backports have been created

@oakrizan
Copy link
Contributor Author

oakrizan commented Mar 5, 2025

@mergify backport 8.x

Copy link
Contributor

mergify bot commented Mar 5, 2025

backport 8.x

✅ Backports have been created

mergify bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 5, 2025
mergify bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 5, 2025
mergify bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 5, 2025
oakrizan added a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 6, 2025
(cherry picked from commit beba866)

Co-authored-by: Olga Naydyonock <olga.naidjonoka@elastic.co>
oakrizan added a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 6, 2025
(cherry picked from commit beba866)

Co-authored-by: Olga Naydyonock <olga.naidjonoka@elastic.co>
oakrizan added a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 6, 2025
(cherry picked from commit beba866)

Co-authored-by: Olga Naydyonock <olga.naidjonoka@elastic.co>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants