-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 70
🌱 standardizing approach for required-tests-with-occasional-overrides #2431
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
🌱 standardizing approach for required-tests-with-occasional-overrides #2431
Conversation
✅ Deploy Preview for olmv1 ready!
To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify project configuration. |
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.
Pull request overview
This PR standardizes the approach for handling test overrides in required CI workflows by moving the override logic from shell scripts to GitHub Actions workflow steps. The change enables users to apply labels like go-verdiff-override or crd-diff-override to PRs to bypass test failures while maintaining a record of the override.
Key Changes:
- Moved override checking logic from bash scripts to GitHub Actions workflow files
- Implemented a two-step pattern: run the test with error continuation, then check for override labels
- Standardized the override label naming convention to
<workflow-name>-override
Reviewed changes
Copilot reviewed 3 out of 3 changed files in this pull request and generated 4 comments.
| File | Description |
|---|---|
| hack/tools/check-go-version.sh | Removed override label checking logic and LABELS environment variable handling from the shell script |
| .github/workflows/go-verdiff.yaml | Added separate step for checking override labels with proper error handling and environment configuration |
| .github/workflows/crd-diff.yaml | Added override label checking step following the same pattern as go-verdiff workflow |
💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.
b72e84a to
208d638
Compare
208d638 to
fc9de18
Compare
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.
Pull request overview
Copilot reviewed 3 out of 3 changed files in this pull request and generated 2 comments.
💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.
Signed-off-by: grokspawn <jordan@nimblewidget.com>
fc9de18 to
54109b1
Compare
|
/lgtm |
Codecov Report✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests. Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #2431 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 73.05% 72.96% -0.10%
==========================================
Files 100 100
Lines 7641 7641
==========================================
- Hits 5582 5575 -7
- Misses 1623 1630 +7
Partials 436 436
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
oceanc80
left a comment
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.
/lgtm
rashmigottipati
left a comment
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.
/lgtm
|
/approve |
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: grokspawn, rashmigottipati The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. The pull request process is described here DetailsNeeds approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
25aa763
into
operator-framework:main
Description
Updates the go-ver-diff and crd-diff tests to follow a standardized approach where they examine labels on the PR to override against failures. This provides the ability for good override capture for required tests (which we want occasionally to override) in a context where having GH handles the tests and prow handles the merges doesn't include the ability for prow to override GH tests.
In this case, creation and application of a label of the form
<workflow-name>-overrideon the PR will allow the test to fail but record the override for prosperity.Reviewer Checklist