Pass a non-infinite returnTime in history patching tests

[serathius]

Since we use MaxInt64 to represent infinite for failed transactions, there is no need to provide some infinite ourselves. We can just pass returnTime observed by client and expect it will be set to infinite during preparation step.

/assign @henrybear327

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 68.82%. Comparing base (02d62f6) to head (1cf63f1).
Report is 5 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

see 23 files with indirect coverage changes

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main   #19679   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   68.81%   68.82%           
=======================================
  Files         421      421           
  Lines       35855    35855           
=======================================
+ Hits        24674    24677    +3     
+ Misses       9762     9750   -12     
- Partials     1419     1428    +9     

---

Continue to review full report in Codecov by Sentry.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 0fbac24...1cf63f1. Read the comment docs.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

[henrybear327]

Applied the changes to #19669 and the tests have passed.

[serathius]

Hmm, I cannot merge PR with just review from etcd member. Need approve from someone with write access?

Seems like a regression when compared to K8s merge bot.

/assign @ahrtr

[k8s-ci-robot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: ahrtr, henrybear327, serathius

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• OWNERS [ahrtr,serathius]

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

[ahrtr]

Hmm, I cannot merge PR with just review from etcd member.

It worths introducing K8s auto-merge bot (at least for test and non-critical parts, i.e. etcdutl, etcdctl, grpcproxy, workflow etc.)? cc @ivanvc @jmhbnz

[serathius]

It worths introducing K8s auto-merge bot (at least for test and non-critical parts, i.e. etcdutl, etcdctl, grpcproxy, workflow etc.)? cc @ivanvc @jmhbnz

I would say yes, assuming that we will maintain the same merge practices, use /hold command for critical command to ensure everyone had chance to review. Sounds ok?

Would love to finally utilize OWNERS so we can motivate contributors to specialize in particular area, instead of not getting anything until they understand most of codebase.

[ahrtr]

I would say yes, assuming that we will maintain the same merge practices, use /hold command for critical command to ensure everyone had chance to review. Sounds ok?

Basically sounds good. But we may forget to add /hold sometimes for critical change:( But anyway, leave it to @ivanvc and @jmhbnz to drive this.

[ivanvc]

I would say yes, assuming that we will maintain the same merge practices, use /hold command for critical command to ensure everyone had chance to review. Sounds ok?

Basically sounds good. But we may forget to add /hold sometimes for critical change:( But anyway, leave it to @ivanvc and @jmhbnz to drive this.

James was working on this. IIRC, there were challenges with our DCO check in his exploration. We agreed to test the workflow on the website.