Cleanups on how matrix of scenario/weblog functions

[cbeauchesne]

Motivation

Cleaner code, pave the way of moving this matrix parameters in weblog metadata yml files

Changes

Use objects, rather string identifier in _is_supported and all parent functions.

How to test

comparizon in test optim

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?
  • Get a review from R&P team

[github-actions]

CODEOWNERS have been resolved as:

tests/test_the_test/test_ci_orchestrator.py                             @DataDog/system-tests-core
tests/test_the_test/test_group_rules.py                                 @DataDog/system-tests-core
utils/_context/_scenarios/__init__.py                                   @DataDog/system-tests-core
utils/_context/_scenarios/aws_lambda.py                                 @DataDog/system-tests-core
utils/_context/_scenarios/otel_collector.py                             @DataDog/system-tests-core
utils/_context/_scenarios/performance.py                                @DataDog/system-tests-core
utils/scripts/ci_orchestrators/workflow_data.py                         @DataDog/system-tests-core
utils/scripts/compute-workflow-parameters.py                            @DataDog/system-tests-core

[datadog-prod-us1-5]

🎉 All green!

🧪 All tests passed
❄️ No new flaky tests detected

_{This comment will be updated automatically if new data arrives.
🔗 Commit SHA: b181cd7 | Docs | Datadog PR Page | Give us feedback!}

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 554129c236

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Codex has been enabled to automatically 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 👍.

When you sign up for Codex through ChatGPT, Codex can also answer questions or update the PR, like "@codex address that feedback".

[cbeauchesne]

@codex review

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 62395c8c44

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Codex has been enabled to automatically 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 👍.

When you sign up for Codex through ChatGPT, Codex can also answer questions or update the PR, like "@codex address that feedback".

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

Include GraphQL error tracking in the whitelist

When compute-workflow-parameters is called with --groups graphql, GRAPHQL_ERROR_TRACKING is now selected by that group, but this whitelist still only treats GRAPHQL_APPSEC as a GraphQL scenario. The later GraphQL-weblog guard rejects gqlgen, graph-gophers, graphql-go, and graphql23 for GRAPHQL_ERROR_TRACKING, while unrelated weblogs can still be scheduled, so the new group does not run this GraphQL test on the apps it targets.

Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

Keep performance group backrefs in sync

Assigning self.scenario_groups after EndToEndScenario.__init__ makes the ScenarioGroup reverse indexes inconsistent: the base Scenario.__init__ has already appended PERFORMANCES to all, end_to_end, and tracer_release, and this assignment never appends it to exotics. Any test using a @scenario_groups.<group> decorator will still see PERFORMANCES in the old groups and not in exotics, while CI selection reads the overwritten scenario.scenario_groups, so the two selection paths disagree.

Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.