open-vault/CODEOWNERS
Line: 8: incorrect codeowner organization: hashicorp/vault-ecosystem Line: 8: no users/groups matched Line: 9: incorrect codeowner organization: hashicorp/vault-ecosystem Line: 9: no users/groups matched Line: 10: incorrect codeowner organization: hashicorp/vault-ecosystem Line: 10: no users/groups matched Line: 11: incorrect codeowner organization: hashicorp/vault-ecosystem Line: 11: no users/groups matched Line: 14: incorrect codeowner organization: hashicorp/vault-ecosystem Line: 14: no users/groups matched Line: 15: incorrect codeowner organization: hashicorp/vault-ecosystem Line: 15: no users/groups matched Line: 16: incorrect codeowner organization: hashicorp/vault-ecosystem Line: 16: no users/groups matched Line: 17: incorrect codeowner organization: hashicorp/vault-ecosystem Line: 17: no users/groups matched Line: 18: incorrect codeowner organization: hashicorp/vault-ecosystem Line: 18: no users/groups matched Line: 19: incorrect codeowner organization: hashicorp/vault-ecosystem Line: 19: no users/groups matched Line: 20: incorrect codeowner organization: hashicorp/vault-ecosystem Line: 20: no users/groups matched Line: 21: incorrect codeowner organization: hashicorp/vault-ecosystem Line: 21: no users/groups matched Line: 22: incorrect codeowner organization: hashicorp/vault-ecosystem Line: 22: no users/groups matched Line: 23: incorrect codeowner organization: hashicorp/vault-ecosystem Line: 23: no users/groups matched Line: 25: incorrect codeowner organization: hashicorp/vault-ecosystem Line: 25: no users/groups matched Line: 26: incorrect codeowner organization: hashicorp/vault-ecosystem Line: 26: no users/groups matched Line: 28: incorrect codeowner user: tjperry07 Line: 28: no users/groups matched Line: 29: incorrect codeowner user: acahn Line: 29: incorrect codeowner user: tjperry07 Line: 29: no users/groups matched Line: 32: incorrect codeowner user: fairclothjm Line: 32: incorrect codeowner user: tjperry07 Line: 32: no users/groups matched Line: 33: incorrect codeowner user: fairclothjm Line: 33: incorrect codeowner user: tjperry07 Line: 33: no users/groups matched Line: 38: incorrect codeowner user: austingebauer Line: 38: no users/groups matched Line: 39: incorrect codeowner user: austingebauer Line: 39: no users/groups matched Line: 42: incorrect codeowner organization: hashicorp/release-engineering Line: 42: incorrect codeowner organization: hashicorp/github-secure-vault-core Line: 42: incorrect codeowner organization: hashicorp/quality-team Line: 42: no users/groups matched Line: 43: incorrect codeowner organization: hashicorp/release-engineering Line: 43: incorrect codeowner organization: hashicorp/github-secure-vault-core Line: 43: incorrect codeowner organization: hashicorp/quality-team Line: 43: no users/groups matched Line: 46: incorrect codeowner organization: hashicorp/quality-team Line: 46: no users/groups matched Line: 47: incorrect codeowner organization: hashicorp/quality-team Line: 47: no users/groups matched
Ryan Cragun bd5d738ad7
[QT-436] Pseudo random artifact test scenarios (#18056)
Introducing a new approach to testing Vault artifacts before merge
and after merge/notorization/signing. Rather than run a few static
scenarios across the artifacts, we now have the ability to run a
pseudo random sample of scenarios across many different build artifacts.

We've added 20 possible scenarios for the AMD64 and ARM64 binary
bundles, which we've broken into five test groups. On any given push to
a pull request branch, we will now choose a random test group and
execute its corresponding scenarios against the resulting build
artifacts. This gives us greater test coverage but lets us split the
verification across many different pull requests.

The post-merge release testing pipeline behaves in a similar fashion,
however, the artifacts that we use for testing have been notarized and
signed prior to testing. We've also reduce the number of groups so that
we run more scenarios after merge to a release branch.

We intend to take what we've learned building this in Github Actions and
roll it into an easier to use feature that is native to Enos. Until then,
we'll have to manually add scenarios to each matrix file and manually
number the test group. It's important to note that Github requires every
matrix to include at least one vector, so every artifact that is being
tested must include a single scenario in order for all workflows to pass
and thus satisfy branch merge requirements.

* Add support for different artifact types to enos-run
* Add support for different runner type to enos-run
* Add arm64 scenarios to build matrix
* Expand build matrices to include different variants
* Update Consul versions in Enos scenarios and matrices
* Refactor enos-run environment
* Add minimum version filtering support to enos-run. This allows us to
  automatically exclude scenarios that require a more recent version of
  Vault
* Add maximum version filtering support to enos-run. This allows us to
  automatically exclude scenarios that require an older version of
  Vault
* Fix Node 12 deprecation warnings
* Rename enos-verify-stable to enos-release-testing-oss
* Convert artifactory matrix into enos-release-testing-oss matrices
* Add all Vault editions to Enos scenario matrices
* Fix verify version with complex Vault edition metadata
* Rename the crt-builder to ci-helper
* Add more version helpers to ci-helper and Makefile
* Update CODEOWNERS for quality team
* Add support for filtering matrices by group and version constraints
* Add support for pseudo random test scenario execution

Signed-off-by: Ryan Cragun <me@ryan.ec>
2022-12-12 13:46:04 -07:00

48 lines
2.2 KiB
Plaintext

# Each line is a file pattern followed by one or more owners. Being an owner
# means those groups or individuals will be added as reviewers to PRs affecting
# those areas of the code.
#
# More on CODEOWNERS files: https://help.github.com/en/github/creating-cloning-and-archiving-repositories/about-code-owners
# Select Auth engines are owned by Ecosystem
/builtin/credential/aws/ @hashicorp/vault-ecosystem
/builtin/credential/github/ @hashicorp/vault-ecosystem
/builtin/credential/ldap/ @hashicorp/vault-ecosystem
/builtin/credential/okta/ @hashicorp/vault-ecosystem
# Secrets engines (pki, ssh, totp and transit omitted)
/builtin/logical/aws/ @hashicorp/vault-ecosystem
/builtin/logical/cassandra/ @hashicorp/vault-ecosystem
/builtin/logical/consul/ @hashicorp/vault-ecosystem
/builtin/logical/database/ @hashicorp/vault-ecosystem
/builtin/logical/mongodb/ @hashicorp/vault-ecosystem
/builtin/logical/mssql/ @hashicorp/vault-ecosystem
/builtin/logical/mysql/ @hashicorp/vault-ecosystem
/builtin/logical/nomad/ @hashicorp/vault-ecosystem
/builtin/logical/postgresql/ @hashicorp/vault-ecosystem
/builtin/logical/rabbitmq/ @hashicorp/vault-ecosystem
/plugins/ @hashicorp/vault-ecosystem
/vault/plugin_catalog.go @hashicorp/vault-ecosystem
/website/content/ @tjperry07
/website/content/docs/plugin-portal.mdx @acahn @tjperry07
# Plugin docs
/website/content/docs/plugins/ @fairclothjm @tjperry07
/website/content/docs/upgrading/plugins.mdx @fairclothjm @tjperry07
# UI code related to Vault's JWT/OIDC auth method and OIDC provider.
# Changes to these files often require coordination with backend code,
# so stewards of the backend code are added below for notification.
/ui/app/components/auth-jwt.js @austingebauer
/ui/app/routes/vault/cluster/oidc-*.js @austingebauer
# Release config; service account is required for automation tooling.
/.release/ @hashicorp/release-engineering @hashicorp/github-secure-vault-core @hashicorp/quality-team
/.github/workflows/build.yml @hashicorp/release-engineering @hashicorp/github-secure-vault-core @hashicorp/quality-team
# Quality engineering
/.github/ @hashicorp/quality-team
/enos/ @hashicorp/quality-team