Dennis-Mircea opened a new pull request, #1107:
URL: https://github.com/apache/flink-kubernetes-operator/pull/1107

   <!--
   *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
   
   The e2e GitHub Actions workflow occasionally fails during cluster bootstrap 
with:
   
   ```
   X Exiting due to MK_ADDON_ENABLE: enable failed: run callbacks: running 
callbacks: [waiting for app.kubernetes.io/name=ingress-nginx pods: context 
deadline exceeded]
   ```
   A concrete example can be checked here: 
https://github.com/apache/flink-kubernetes-operator/actions/runs/25095291568/job/73547999178?pr=1075
   
   The default `minikube addons enable ingress` deadline (~3 min) is regularly 
exceeded on cold GitHub runners that have to pull both the ingress-nginx 
controller and the kube-webhook-certgen images before the controller pods 
become Ready. The failure is not deterministic but blocks affected runs and 
hides legitimate signal in retried jobs.
   
   This pull request mitigates the flake by extending the addon-enable wait and 
wrapping the call in the same retry helper already used for `minikube start`.
   
   
   ## Brief change log
   
   - *[e2e-tests]* Wrapped the addon-enable in `retry_times 3 30` from 
`start_minikube`, mirroring the existing retry pattern around 
`start_minikube_if_not_running`, so a single transient registry hiccup does not 
fail the whole job.
   
   ## Verifying this change
   This change is a CI-only resilience tweak without unit/integration test 
coverage. It is verifiable by inspection and by re-running the e2e workflow:
   
   - The previous behavior was a single non-retried `minikube addons enable 
ingress` with the default ~3 min deadline.
   - The new behavior performs up to 3 attempts with a 30 s back-off, each 
attempt allowed to wait up to 8 min for the ingress-nginx pods to reach Ready.
   - All existing e2e scripts that source `utils.sh` continue to call 
`start_minikube` unchanged, so no test surface is altered.
   
   
   ## 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]

Reply via email to