SorraTheOrc
commented
6 years ago The way I work this in the current implementation is to use separate markdowns for each and reference setup steps in the prerequisites and teardown in the next steps. This works well for tutorials and manually executed demos, but less well for automated testing (which doesn't run next steps).
To facilitate cleanup in automated tests I implemented a "test plan" feature, see docs and example. It turns out that there isn't actually a need for the separate parsing of a test plan anymore (it can be done in mardown now).
This is the main driver for having a validation section for pre-reqs. It enables us to run the setup steps (defined in prerequisites) then cleanup some of the work for the next test but only have the necessary prerequisites re-run.
In all the cases I've built so far this works well and I don't see the need for explicit new sections in the doc. Can you give a concrete example where they are needed and why.
lastcoolnameleft
For tests to be run over again, some walkthroughs need to clean up after themselves. But not completely.
For example, if I want to demo deploying a Helm chart, once the main section is done, we want to allow the option to clean up after itself and delete the helm chart. However, we don't want it to delete the full K8S instance.
We also might want to enable performing a clean prior to running. (i.e. Similar to setup/teardown of most test frameworks)
This gets awkward when factoring in Prerequisites (which have validations to determine if they should be run). My initial thought is to have them independent, and keep Prerequisites focused on conditionals/validation.
My proposal is to introduce 2 optional sections to markdown: