Skip to content

analyze built-in extensions #4812

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.

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
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

pablochacin
Copy link
Contributor

@pablochacin pablochacin commented May 23, 2025

What?

Analyze if the built-in extensions satisfy the dependencies before provisioning a new custom binary

Why?

Binary provisioning is available in any k6 binary, including those with built-in extensions. Considering these extensions can save unnecessary custom binary provisionings.

Checklist

  • I have performed a self-review of my code.
  • I have commented on my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas.
  • I have added tests for my changes.
  • I have run linter and tests locally (make check) and all pass.

Checklist: Documentation (only for k6 maintainers and if relevant)

Please do not merge this PR until the following items are filled out.

  • I have added the correct milestone and labels to the PR.
  • I have updated the release notes: link
  • I have updated or added an issue to the k6-documentation: grafana/k6-docs#NUMBER if applicable
  • I have updated or added an issue to the TypeScript definitions: grafana/k6-DefinitelyTyped#NUMBER if applicable

Related PR(s)/Issue(s)

Depens on #4801

Closes #4697

@pablochacin pablochacin mentioned this pull request May 23, 2025
8 tasks
@pablochacin pablochacin force-pushed the binary-provisioning/analyse-built-in-extensions branch 2 times, most recently from 818edd7 to 371d6aa Compare May 23, 2025 10:55
@pablochacin pablochacin marked this pull request as ready for review May 23, 2025 11:41
@pablochacin pablochacin requested a review from a team as a code owner May 23, 2025 11:41
@pablochacin pablochacin requested review from mstoykov and codebien and removed request for a team May 23, 2025 11:41
mstoykov
mstoykov previously approved these changes Jun 10, 2025
joanlopez
joanlopez previously approved these changes Jun 13, 2025
codebien
codebien previously approved these changes Jul 22, 2025
Base automatically changed from binary-provisioning/integrate-root-cmd to master July 25, 2025 12:28
@mstoykov mstoykov dismissed stale reviews from codebien, joanlopez, and themself July 25, 2025 12:28

The base branch was changed.

@pablochacin pablochacin added this to the v1.2.0 milestone Jul 25, 2025
Signed-off-by: Pablo Chacin <pablochacin@gmail.com>
@pablochacin pablochacin force-pushed the binary-provisioning/analyse-built-in-extensions branch from a562f8d to a0e54e5 Compare July 25, 2025 15:59
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.

Consider extensions built into the k6 binary when checking if binary provisioning is required
4 participants