fix the prow config conflict#81244
Conversation
|
No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉 ℹ️ Recent review info⚙️ Run configurationConfiguration used: Repository YAML (base), Central YAML (inherited) Review profile: CHILL Plan: Enterprise Run ID: 📒 Files selected for processing (6)
💤 Files with no reviewable changes (5)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)
Walkthrough
Changese2e-binary-build-success context migration
Estimated code review effort🎯 1 (Trivial) | ⏱️ ~3 minutes Possibly related PRs
Suggested labels
Suggested reviewers
🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 14 | ❌ 1❌ Failed checks (1 inconclusive)
✅ Passed checks (14 passed)
✨ Finishing Touches🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out. Comment |
openshift-merge-bot
Bot
added
the
rehearsals-ack
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents
Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the
rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate.
Inline comments:
In `@core-services/prow/02_config/_config.yaml`:
- Around line 848-853: The required-if-present-contexts list for the ocm-agent
config is missing ci/prow/validate and incorrectly duplicates ci/prow/coverage,
so update this context set to match the other migrations in the PR. Fix the list
in the relevant _config.yaml block by restoring ci/prow/validate and removing
the duplicate coverage entry, keeping the existing required context names
aligned with the ocm-agent migration.
🪄 Autofix (Beta)
Fix all unresolved CodeRabbit comments on this PR:
- Push a commit to this branch (recommended)
- Create a new PR with the fixes
ℹ️ Review info
⚙️ Run configuration
Configuration used: Repository YAML (base), Central YAML (inherited)
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Enterprise
Run ID: c5c5f14b-82c9-48d6-b236-aa63548de981
📒 Files selected for processing (6)
core-services/prow/02_config/_config.yamlcore-services/prow/02_config/openshift/certman-operator/_prowconfig.yamlcore-services/prow/02_config/openshift/managed-node-metadata-operator/_prowconfig.yamlcore-services/prow/02_config/openshift/managed-upgrade-operator/_prowconfig.yamlcore-services/prow/02_config/openshift/ocm-agent-operator/_prowconfig.yamlcore-services/prow/02_config/openshift/ocm-agent/_prowconfig.yaml
💤 Files with no reviewable changes (5)
- core-services/prow/02_config/openshift/ocm-agent-operator/_prowconfig.yaml
- core-services/prow/02_config/openshift/ocm-agent/_prowconfig.yaml
- core-services/prow/02_config/openshift/certman-operator/_prowconfig.yaml
- core-services/prow/02_config/openshift/managed-upgrade-operator/_prowconfig.yaml
- core-services/prow/02_config/openshift/managed-node-metadata-operator/_prowconfig.yaml
tkong-redhat
force-pushed
the
fix-hulk-config-conflict
branch
from
81be3f9 to
d60443b
Compare
|
[REHEARSALNOTIFIER] Note: If this PR includes changes to step registry files ( Interacting with pj-rehearseComment: Once you are satisfied with the results of the rehearsals, comment: |
|
@tkong-redhat: all tests passed! Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard. DetailsInstructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository. I understand the commands that are listed here. |
|
/lgtm |
|
/approve |
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: chamalabey, hector-vido, tkong-redhat 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 |
openshift-ci
Bot
added
the
approved
|
@tkong-redhat: Updated the following 2 configmaps:
DetailsIn response to this:
Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository. |
3 participants
e2e-binary-build-success is optional and is not running always.
Putting it into required check which caused the conflict issue in prow. Hence remove it from required check.
Put the check in tide
Summary by CodeRabbit
This PR adjusts OpenShift CI/prow configuration to resolve the
e2e-binary-build-successcheck conflict by moving it out of branch protection and into Tide handling where appropriate.In practice, this means:
ci/prow/e2e-binary-build-successas a mandatory branch-protection status check on their protected branches.certman-operator,managed-node-metadata-operator,managed-upgrade-operator,ocm-agent, andocm-agent-operator, along with corresponding Tide updates in the central prow config.This should prevent the inconsistent optional check from conflicting with Prow’s required checks while preserving merge protection through Tide.