Patrick Ohly

> will this GinkgoContext() allow to users to implement graceful shutdowns and per test timeouts ? I think it would help those suite developers who don't want to run cleanup...

@aojea : you know the Kubernetes E2E suite. What's your opinion, would it make sense for us to run `AfterEach` in parallel to an `It` that has timed out but...

> The cleanup on the E2E depends on Kubernetes "namespaces", the framework creates a new namespace for each test, runs the test and in AfterEach it deletes the namespace. Not...

> I have an idea for a design that would allow users to have a per-It timeout as well. Now that Kubernetes has switched to Ginkgo v2, I'd like to...

> So a quick sketch of what I'm imagining. I'll need to flesh this out and really think through the various edge cases. But, for starters, I could imagine that...

> Your proposal for `SIGINT` makes sense - but it's not far from today's behavior. Today `Ctrl-C` immediately starts running the next cleanup node. So if you have multiple clean...

> But there would still need to be a backstop, correct? Let's focus on the timeout use-case (either suite level with --ginkgo.timeout or the per-node timeout). Let's say the timeout...

> (a) this will not make a strong guarantee that cleanup code will never happen in parallel with It code since we will have to have a backstop that effectively...

> today it could be accomplished with a kubeadm config patch in the kind cluster config, I'll prototype something soon. That's fine. It's really a corner-case, so the solution doesn't...

Did we agree to implement something which embeds a unique ID in a non-standard kubelet data directory? After the comment about loopfs I wasn't sure anymore. As pointed out in...