-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 61
[DNM] Add dummy task, pipeline, and ITS for EC-2011 POC #3476
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
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Changes from all commits
21a331d
af738f7
8bb6ae1
2371d4e
a9b6c18
f78bd2d
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
|
|
@@ -30,6 +30,7 @@ jobs: | |
|
|
||
| stress: | ||
| name: Stress Benchmark | ||
| if: false # skipped for POC branch | ||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. [medium] scope-creep Disabling all GitHub Actions CI jobs goes beyond the stated POC goal of dog-fooding a required task in an ITS. Blanket CI suppression is orthogonal scope. |
||
| runs-on: ubuntu-latest | ||
| timeout-minutes: 15 | ||
| continue-on-error: true | ||
|
|
||
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
|
|
@@ -34,6 +34,7 @@ permissions: | |
| jobs: | ||
|
|
||
| Test: | ||
| if: false # skipped for POC branch | ||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. 🎯 Functional Correctness | 🟠 Major | ⚡ Quick win Replace the constant job conditions with one lint-valid POC gate.
🧰 Tools🪛 actionlint (1.7.12)[error] 37-37: constant expression "false" in condition. remove the if: section (if-cond) 📍 Affects 1 file
🤖 Prompt for AI AgentsSource: Linters/SAST tools There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. [high] CI coverage regression The Suggested fix: Remove the There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. [high] CI coverage regression Adding if: false to the Test, Acceptance, and Upload jobs disables all test and coverage CI for every PR and push to main. The release workflow (release.yaml) triggers on workflow_run with conclusion=='success'. Since the Tools job still runs and skipped jobs do not fail the workflow, the overall conclusion will be 'success', meaning releases could proceed on every main push without any test validation. Suggested fix: Do not merge if: false on the main branch. Keep these changes on a separate POC branch, use path-based conditions, or disable the release workflow trigger as well. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. [medium] scope-creep Disabling all three CI jobs is beyond the stated intent of adding a dummy task/pipeline. The PR is marked [DNM] but is not a draft, increasing the risk of accidental merge. No documented cleanup plan or expiration date exists for the POC artifacts. Suggested fix: Remove CI workflow changes from this PR, or convert to a draft PR. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. [high] CI coverage regression All three CI jobs (Test, Acceptance, Upload) are unconditionally disabled with if: false. This workflow runs on PRs and pushes to main and release-* branches. If merged, all Go unit tests, integration tests, acceptance tests, code generation checks, and code coverage uploads would be permanently disabled for all future PRs and pushes to main. Suggested fix: Do not merge the if: false changes to main. If this POC branch needs to skip these checks, use a branch-specific condition or keep this change on a non-main branch only. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. [high] protected-path This PR modifies a file under the .github/ protected path. The PR has no linked GitHub issue and the description does not explain why CI jobs need to be disabled. Changes to governance and infrastructure files require human approval. Suggested fix: Create a linked GitHub issue explaining the rationale for disabling CI jobs, or move this change to a non-main branch. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. [high] CI coverage regression All three CI jobs (Test, Acceptance, Upload) are unconditionally disabled with if: false. The PR is not marked as draft and targets main. If merged, all unit tests, integration tests, acceptance tests, and code coverage uploads from this workflow are disabled for subsequent PRs. The [DNM] title convention is not enforced by branch protection. Suggested fix: Mark this PR as a draft to prevent accidental merge, or remove the CI-disabling changes from this PR entirely. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. [high] CI coverage regression All three CI jobs (Test, Acceptance, Upload) are unconditionally disabled with 'if: false'. This workflow runs on pull_request and push to main and release-* branches. If merged to main, all subsequent PRs will lack unit test, acceptance test, and code-coverage CI signal. No other workflow provides equivalent coverage. Suggested fix: Do not merge these 'if: false' guards to main. Either scope the skip to the POC branch with a conditional expression, or remove the guards before merging. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. [high] CI coverage regression Adding Suggested fix: Scope the skip to the POC branch only (e.g., There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. [high] ci-safety-guard-disabled All CI test jobs (Test, Acceptance, Upload) are unconditionally disabled with if: false. If accidentally merged or cherry-picked, CI protection for the repository is silently removed. Suggested fix: Use a branch-conditional guard (e.g., if: github.ref != 'refs/heads/reqd-task-its-poc') instead of if: false. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. [high] CI coverage regression Adding Suggested fix: Mark the PR as draft or use a branch-scoped condition (e.g., There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. [high] protected-path Files under the protected Suggested fix: Link a GitHub issue that authorizes the CI workflow modifications, or remove the There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. [medium] CI-coverage-regression Adding Suggested fix: Use a branch-scoped condition such as There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. [medium] scope-creep Disabling all CI quality gates via Suggested fix: Remove the There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. [high] CI coverage regression Adding if: false to the Test, Acceptance, and Upload jobs unconditionally disables all unit tests, acceptance tests, and code coverage uploads. If merged, code could land on main without test or coverage signal. The if: false approach is branch-unaware. Suggested fix: Replace if: false with a branch-conditional guard or move POC artifacts to a separate branch without modifying shared CI workflows. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. [high] CI coverage regression Adding if: false unconditionally disables the Test, Acceptance, and Upload Coverage jobs. This workflow provides unit test, integration test, acceptance test, and code coverage gate signal on PRs and pushes to main/release-* branches. If merged, all PRs and pushes to main would land without these CI checks. Suggested fix: Use a branch-name condition instead of if: false, or move CI-disabling to a separate workflow file on the POC branch. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. [low] scope-coherence Disabling CI jobs with if: false is scope creep beyond the POC's stated purpose of testing Tekton pipelines and artifacts in Konflux. Suggested fix: Remove the if: false additions or use branch-level filtering in workflow triggers. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. [high] protected-path Protected path modified: .github/workflows/checks-codecov.yaml and .github/workflows/codeql.yaml are under the .github/ protected path. The PR has no linked GitHub issue and does not explain why CI workflow files need to be modified. Human approval is always required for changes to governance and infrastructure files. Suggested fix: Link a GitHub issue authorizing the CI workflow changes, or remove the if: false modifications from the protected workflow files. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. [medium] CI coverage regression if: false unconditionally disables the Test, Acceptance, and Upload jobs. These guards are not branch-scoped, so accidental merge would disable all tests and coverage for the repository. Suggested fix: Use a branch-scoped condition like if: github.head_ref != reqd-task-its-poc rather than if: false. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. [medium] scope-creep Disabling CI workflows is outside the PRs stated scope of add dummy task, pipeline, and ITS for EC-2011 POC. Suggested fix: Remove the if: false guards. Use [skip ci] in individual commit messages if CI is too slow for iteration. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. [high] protected-path PR modifies files under the protected .github/ path (.github/workflows/checks-codecov.yaml, .github/workflows/codeql.yaml). No linked issue exists and the PR description does not specifically explain why CI workflow files are being modified. Human approval is always required for protected-path changes. Suggested fix: Link a GitHub issue authorizing the CI workflow changes, or remove the workflow modifications from this PR. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. [medium] CI coverage regression Adding if: false unconditionally disables the Test, Acceptance, and Upload jobs for all branches. The comment says 'skipped for POC branch' but if: false is not branch-conditional, so if merged it would disable CI for all branches. Suggested fix: Replace if: false with a branch-scoped condition or keep these changes out of the workflow files entirely. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. [medium] scope-mismatch CI disabling is a significant scope expansion beyond the stated intent of adding dummy task/pipeline/ITS. The CI changes are unnecessary for the POC goal. Suggested fix: Remove the if: false additions. Use per-commit skip mechanisms instead. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. [medium] CI coverage regression All three jobs (Test, Acceptance, Upload) are unconditionally disabled with if: false, removing unit tests, acceptance tests, and code coverage uploads for all PRs and pushes to main/release branches. Suggested fix: Remove the CI workflow changes. CI failures on a draft POC branch are acceptable; blanket if: false is unnecessary. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. [medium] scope-creep Disabling all CI checks goes beyond the stated intent of adding a dummy task, pipeline, and ITS for EC-2011 POC. CI disabling is a separate concern from adding test pipeline artifacts. Suggested fix: Remove the if: false additions from the CI workflow files. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. [high] CI-coverage-regression All three jobs (Test, Acceptance, Upload) are disabled with Suggested fix: Use branch-scoped conditions (e.g., There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. [medium] scope-creep Disabling all CI jobs (tests, coverage, CodeQL) goes beyond the stated scope of 'add dummy task, pipeline, and ITS.' This represents significant scope expansion. Suggested fix: Remove the CI-disabling changes or use branch-level workflow filtering. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. [medium] CI-coverage-regression Adding if: false unconditionally disables the Test, Acceptance, and Upload jobs. These jobs gate unit tests, acceptance tests, code generation checks, and coverage uploads. If merged, subsequent PRs to main would land without this CI signal. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. [medium] CI coverage regression if: false unconditionally disables the Test, Acceptance, and Upload Coverage jobs for all PRs and pushes to main/release-* branches. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. [medium] CI coverage regression All CI jobs (Test, Acceptance, Coverage Upload, CodeQL, Lint) are unconditionally disabled via if: false across four workflow files. If merged to main, removes all CI signal from the merge gate. The guard is not branch-scoped. Suggested fix: Scope the skip to the POC branch only, or remove the if: false additions entirely. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. [high] CI coverage regression All CI jobs across four workflow files (benchmark, checks-codecov, codeql, lint) are unconditionally disabled with 'if: false'. This removes unit tests, acceptance tests, linting, CodeQL security analysis, and coverage uploads for every PR and push to main. If merged, PRs could land without any CI signal. Suggested fix: Do not merge with 'if: false'. Remove or replace with branch-scoped conditions. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. [high] CI-coverage-regression Adding Suggested fix: Use a branch-name condition (e.g., |
||
| runs-on: ubuntu-latest | ||
| steps: | ||
| - name: Harden Runner | ||
|
|
@@ -96,6 +97,7 @@ jobs: | |
| retention-days: 1 | ||
|
|
||
| Acceptance: | ||
| if: false # skipped for POC branch | ||
| runs-on: ubuntu-latest | ||
| steps: | ||
| # Disabled until we figure out the "Could not resolve host: github.com" in | ||
|
|
@@ -164,6 +166,7 @@ jobs: | |
|
|
||
| Upload: | ||
| name: "Upload Coverage Statistics" | ||
| if: false # skipped for POC branch | ||
| runs-on: ubuntu-latest | ||
| needs: [Test, Acceptance] | ||
| steps: | ||
|
|
||
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
|
|
@@ -32,6 +32,7 @@ permissions: | |
|
|
||
| jobs: | ||
| analyze: | ||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. [high] CI security checks disabled CodeQL and all GHA CI quality/security gates are disabled with Suggested fix: Use a branch-conditional |
||
| if: false # skipped for POC branch | ||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. [high] CI coverage regression / Security scanning bypass Adding Suggested fix: Scope the condition to the POC branch or do not merge this workflow change to main. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. [high] ci-safety-guard-disabled CodeQL security scanning is disabled via if: false on the analyze job. If merged, the repository would lose automated SAST for Go code on pushes, pull requests, and scheduled scans. Suggested fix: Use a branch-conditional guard instead of if: false, or leave the workflow unmodified. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. [high] CI coverage regression Adding Suggested fix: Use a branch-scoped condition or mark PR as draft to prevent accidental merge. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. [medium] CI-coverage-regression The Suggested fix: Scope the skip condition to this branch only, or remove the CI modification. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. [medium] CI-security-regression Disabling CodeQL removes automated static analysis security scanning for the repository if merged. Suggested fix: Do not disable CodeQL scanning on the main branch. Use branch-specific conditions or keep changes on a non-protected branch. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. [high] CI coverage regression The CodeQL security analysis job is unconditionally disabled with if: false. This removes static security scanning for any branch carrying this commit, including the weekly scheduled scan on main. Suggested fix: Use a branch-conditional guard or avoid modifying shared CI workflows in POC branches. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. [high] CI coverage regression Adding if: false disables the CodeQL security analysis job. This workflow runs on PRs to main, pushes to main, and on a weekly schedule. If merged, it would eliminate static analysis security scanning and the weekly scheduled scan entirely. Suggested fix: Use a branch-specific condition or keep CI modifications out of the PR entirely. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. [medium] CI coverage regression if: false unconditionally disables CodeQL security analysis. Same accidental-merge risk as the checks-codecov workflow. Suggested fix: Use a branch-scoped condition or remove this change entirely. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. [medium] CI coverage regression Adding if: false unconditionally disables the CodeQL security analysis job for all triggers including the weekly cron. Suggested fix: Use a branch-conditional skip or remove this change. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. [medium] CI coverage regression The CodeQL security analysis job is unconditionally disabled with if: false, removing SAST coverage for all PRs, pushes to main, and the scheduled weekly scan. Suggested fix: Remove this change from the PR. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. [high] CI-coverage-regression CodeQL security analysis job disabled with Suggested fix: Use branch-scoped conditions or keep this change off the PR. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. [medium] CI-coverage-regression Adding if: false unconditionally disables the CodeQL security analysis job. If merged, no CodeQL scanning would run for future PRs, pushes, or the weekly schedule. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. [medium] CI coverage regression if: false disables CodeQL security scanning for all branches and the weekly schedule. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. [high] CI-coverage-regression Adding Suggested fix: Use a branch-name condition or remove this change. |
||
| name: Analyze | ||
| runs-on: ubuntu-latest | ||
| permissions: | ||
|
|
||
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
|
|
@@ -34,6 +34,7 @@ permissions: | |
| jobs: | ||
| lint: | ||
| name: Lint | ||
| if: false # skipped for POC branch | ||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. [high] CI-coverage-regression Adding Suggested fix: Use a branch-name condition or remove this change. |
||
| runs-on: ubuntu-latest | ||
| permissions: | ||
| contents: read | ||
|
|
||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
[medium] scope-creep
Disabling all GitHub Actions CI jobs and removing ~240 lines of Tekton security scanning tasks are not part of the stated EC-2011 scope. The POC-specific files could be added without modifying production CI/CD configuration.
Suggested fix: Remove
if: falseadditions from workflow files. Revert Tekton pipeline deletions and create a separate PipelineRun.