Skip to content

Use TestContainers for AWS Local Stack #19157

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Open
hishamco wants to merge 6 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Use TestContainers for AWS Local Stack #19157

Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
6 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
2ec32b2
Use TestContainers for AWS Local Stack
hishamco Apr 15, 2026
0cad839
Add integration tests to GitHub workflow
hishamco Apr 16, 2026
82df941
Try to use latest image
hishamco Apr 17, 2026
a9abdb2
Revert "Try to use latest image"
hishamco Apr 17, 2026
51e1c63
Run integration tests on linux only
hishamco Apr 17, 2026
bcbc8e6
Tweaks
hishamco Apr 17, 2026
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
67 changes: 0 additions & 67 deletions .github/workflows/integration_tests.yml
View file
Open in desktop

This file was deleted.

4 changes: 4 additions & 0 deletions .github/workflows/main_ci.yml
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -63,3 +63,7 @@ jobs:
src/OrchardCore.Mvc.Web/App_Data_Tests/logs
test/OrchardCore.Tests.Functional/traces
retention-days: 3
- name: Integration Tests
if: matrix.os == 'ubuntu-24.04'
run: |
dotnet test --project ./test/OrchardCore.Tests.Integration/OrchardCore.Tests.Integration.csproj -c Release --no-build
4 changes: 4 additions & 0 deletions .github/workflows/pr_ci.yml
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -59,3 +59,7 @@ jobs:
src/OrchardCore.Mvc.Web/App_Data_Tests/logs
test/OrchardCore.Tests.Functional/traces
retention-days: 3
- name: Integration Tests
if: matrix.os == 'ubuntu-24.04'
run: |
dotnet test --project ./test/OrchardCore.Tests.Integration/OrchardCore.Tests.Integration.csproj -c Release --no-build
4 changes: 4 additions & 0 deletions .github/workflows/preview_ci.yml
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -66,6 +66,10 @@ jobs:
src/OrchardCore.Mvc.Web/App_Data_Tests/logs
test/OrchardCore.Tests.Functional/traces
retention-days: 3
- name: Integration Tests
if: matrix.os == 'ubuntu-24.04'
run: |
dotnet test --project ./test/OrchardCore.Tests.Integration/OrchardCore.Tests.Integration.csproj -c Release --no-build
- name: Deploy preview NuGet packages
if: steps.check-publish.outputs.should-publish == 'true'
run: |
Expand Down
3 changes: 2 additions & 1 deletion Directory.Packages.props
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -64,6 +64,7 @@
<PackageVersion Include="SixLabors.ImageSharp.Web.Providers.AWS" Version="3.2.0" />
<PackageVersion Include="StackExchange.Redis" Version="2.12.8" />
<PackageVersion Include="StyleCop.Analyzers" Version="1.1.118" />
<PackageVersion Include="Testcontainers.LocalStack" Version="4.11.0" />
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@Skrypt Skrypt Apr 17, 2026 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This PR looks good although @Piedone really wanted that we use S3Mock because it is lighter in size and executes faster. There is a Java version but no C# one on Testcontainers. Also, let's keep the integration_tests.yml file and nothing else, I don't think @Piedone will like it.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

@hishamco hishamco Apr 17, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

When the build trigger, I didn't notice any delay

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@Skrypt Skrypt Apr 17, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

image

That's 1min 55 seconds execution time added on every PR.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@Piedone Piedone Apr 18, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yep. This pulls in everything from AWS. We just need S3.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

@hishamco hishamco Apr 19, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I will check I remembered there's an option to specify the service, such as S3 for instance, but I need to make sure

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@Piedone Piedone Apr 19, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We can do that if and when we'll do that. No need to waste time until that uncertain future.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

@hishamco hishamco Apr 19, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This PR based on the meeting feedback, but you or Jasmin can discuss that as a topic in the upcoming meeting

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@Piedone Piedone Apr 19, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

At this stage, this PR makes things worse in two ways, what Jasmin and I pointed out here. There's no need to discuss this at the meeting, especially not among the two of us, since we're in agreement. It's you who needs to reflect on the feedback.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

@hishamco hishamco Apr 19, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Don't get me wrong. I understand your feedback very well :) But it would be nice if @Skrypt mentioned the concern in the last meeting - to save the time -

Based on the discussion, @sebastienros suggested using TestContainers, which is why I submitted the PR, but not forcing acceptance of it

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@Skrypt Skrypt Apr 19, 2026 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I could not raise a concern not knowing which Docker image is available from testcontainer. I asked questions in that meeting and I said I would try ; which is what you did here. Now, if that makes things worst now we know. Can't know without trying. Thanks for doing the work and saving me time. Now we know that we should'nt assume that testcontainer is better all the time.

<PackageVersion Include="xunit.v3.mtp-v2" Version="3.2.2" />
<PackageVersion Include="YesSql" Version="5.4.7" />
<PackageVersion Include="YesSql.Abstractions" Version="5.4.7" />
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -110,4 +111,4 @@
<PackageVersion Include="System.IO.Hashing" Version="10.0.5" />
<PackageVersion Include="System.Text.Json" Version="10.0.5" />
</ItemGroup>
</Project>
</Project>
Loading
Loading