Add testing for Windows (both local and CI)

dafyddj commented 4 years ago

PR progress checklist (to be filled in by reviewers)

[ ] Changes to documentation are appropriate (or tick if not required)
[ ] Changes to tests are appropriate (or tick if not required)
[ ] Reviews completed

What type of PR is this?

Primary type

[ ] [build] Changes related to the build system
[ ] [chore] Changes to the build process or auxiliary tools and libraries such as documentation generation
[x] [ci] Changes to the continuous integration configuration
[ ] [feat] A new feature
[ ] [fix] A bug fix
[ ] [perf] A code change that improves performance
[ ] [refactor] A code change that neither fixes a bug nor adds a feature
[ ] [revert] A change used to revert a previous commit
[ ] [style] Changes that do not affect the meaning of the code (white-space, formatting, missing semi-colons, etc.)

Secondary type

[x] [docs] Documentation changes
[x] [test] Adding missing or correcting existing tests

Does this PR introduce a `BREAKING CHANGE`?

No.

Related issues and/or pull requests

Describe the changes you're proposing

Add local testing for Windows using Vagrant. Add CI testing for Windows using GitHub Actions. Fix a regression in Windows default values.

Pillar / config required to test the proposed changes

Debug log showing how the proposed changes work

Documentation checklist

[x] Updated the README (e.g. Available states).
[ ] Updated pillar.example.

Testing checklist

[x] Included in Kitchen (i.e. under state_top).
[x] Covered by new/existing tests (e.g. InSpec, Serverspec, etc.).
[x] Updated the relevant test pillar.

Additional context

pull-assistant[bot] commented 4 years ago

Best reviewed: commit by commit

Optimal code review plan

ci(github): add Windows testing using Actions test(windows): add local testing of Windows using Vagrant/Virtualbox fix(windows): `py2` should still be default like other platforms chore(gemfile.lock): update for `kitchen-vagrant`

Powered by Pull Assistant. Last update 1eca9c7 ... 9a88243. Read the comment docs.

myii commented 4 years ago

@dafyddj The Gemfile.lock adjustments would need to be added to this PR as well, so that the existing Linux testing can actually run. Will propose some changes to the tests as well, to get them passing the Rubocop violations as well as make them a bit more Rubyish.

myii commented 4 years ago

@dafyddj Note that the Gemfile.lock has been updated as part of the weekly maintenance. Apologies for the extra work required here because of that.

myii commented 4 years ago

Checked using https://github.com/myii/ssf-formula/pull/234.

Lovely work, @dafyddj -- merged.

One thing from the review above:

... To be honest, I'd prefer it even more if these sections could be embedded in the controls themselves, like it's been done here:

https://github.com/saltstack-formulas/tomcat-formula/blob/4602740178af04242d96583f453d7c50f3dc74e3/test/integration/default/controls/services_spec.rb#L10-L27

How do you feel about this adjustment being made here?

saltstack-formulas-travis commented 4 years ago

:tada: This PR is included in version 1.4.5 :tada:

The release is available on GitHub release

Your semantic-release bot :package::rocket:

dafyddj commented 4 years ago

Thanks for the merge.

How do you feel about this adjustment being made here?

I believe there's a better place for this kind of "configuration" and we should probably look into using Inputs instead.

saltstack-formulas / salt-formula