Skip to content

chore: upgrade dd-apm-test-agent to v1.61.1#7088

Open
hannahkm wants to merge 5 commits into
mainfrom
hannahkm/upgrade-dd-test-agent
Open

chore: upgrade dd-apm-test-agent to v1.61.1#7088
hannahkm wants to merge 5 commits into
mainfrom
hannahkm/upgrade-dd-test-agent

Conversation

@hannahkm

@hannahkm hannahkm commented Jun 4, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Motivation

Introduce ETP fixes.

Changes

Workflow

  1. ⚠️ Create your PR as draft ⚠️
  2. Work on you PR until the CI passes
  3. Mark it as ready for review
    • Test logic is modified? -> Get a review from RFC owner.
    • Framework is modified, or non obvious usage of it -> get a review from R&P team

🚀 Once your PR is reviewed and the CI green, you can merge it!

🛟 #apm-shared-testing 🛟

Reviewer checklist

  • Anything but tests/ or manifests/ is modified ? I have the approval from R&P team
  • A docker base image is modified?
    • the relevant build-XXX-image label is present
  • A scenario is added, removed or renamed?

@hannahkm hannahkm requested a review from a team as a code owner June 4, 2026 20:37
@github-actions

github-actions Bot commented Jun 4, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

CODEOWNERS have been resolved as:

utils/_context/_scenarios/integration_frameworks.py                     @DataDog/system-tests-core
utils/_context/_scenarios/parametric.py                                 @DataDog/system-tests-core
utils/_context/containers.py                                            @DataDog/system-tests-core

@chatgpt-codex-connector chatgpt-codex-connector Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: f6cb5622c6

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

Comment thread utils/_context/_scenarios/parametric.py Outdated
@datadog-official

datadog-official Bot commented Jun 4, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Pipelines  Tests

Fix all issues with BitsAI

⚠️ Warnings

🚦 6 Pipeline jobs failed

Testing the test | System Tests (dotnet, dev) / End-to-end #1 / uds 1   View in Datadog   GitHub Actions

Testing the test | System Tests (dotnet, prod) / End-to-end #2 / uds 2   View in Datadog   GitHub Actions

Testing the test | System Tests (golang, dev) / End-to-end #3 / uds-echo 3   View in Datadog   GitHub Actions

View all 6 failed jobs.

ℹ️ Info

No other issues found (see more)

🧪 All tests passed
❄️ No new flaky tests detected

Useful? React with 👍 / 👎

This comment will be updated automatically if new data arrives.
🔗 Commit SHA: 402695a | Docs | Datadog PR Page | Give us feedback!

@hannahkm hannahkm marked this pull request as draft June 4, 2026 22:02
@hannahkm hannahkm changed the title chore: upgrade dd-apm-test-agent to v1.59.2 chore: upgrade dd-apm-test-agent to v1.59.3 Jun 5, 2026
@hannahkm hannahkm changed the title chore: upgrade dd-apm-test-agent to v1.59.3 chore: upgrade dd-apm-test-agent to v1.61.1 Jun 10, 2026
@hannahkm hannahkm marked this pull request as ready for review June 10, 2026 23:21

@AlexeyKuznetsov-DD AlexeyKuznetsov-DD left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Just curious if k8s_datadog_kubernetes.py should be updated too?
I can see on line 107: image="ghcr.io/datadog/dd-apm-test-agent/ddapm-test-agent:v1.31.1",

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants