Skip to content

functional-tests: replace /retest comment with ok_to_test label#522

Open
owtaylor wants to merge 1 commit into
rhel-lightspeed:mainfrom
owtaylor:ok-to-test
Open

functional-tests: replace /retest comment with ok_to_test label#522
owtaylor wants to merge 1 commit into
rhel-lightspeed:mainfrom
owtaylor:ok-to-test

Conversation

@owtaylor

@owtaylor owtaylor commented Jul 6, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

The issue_comment trigger produces check runs associated with main's HEAD, not the PR's head commit, so a successful retest never replaced the original failed check in the PR status summary. Switching to a pull_request_target labeled trigger keeps the same (workflow, event, SHA) identity, so the new result properly supersedes the old one.

The ok_to_test label is removed immediately — before the authorization check — so it can always be re-added regardless of whether the actor was authorized.

This is an implementation of the idea from: #389 (comment)

I used a generic ok_to_test label here, because if we had multiple tests that we wanted to gate this way (needs security look-over from a maintainer) we'd only want to do that once per commit.

Assisted-by: Claude Opus 4.6 noreply@anthropic.com
Closes: #389

The issue_comment trigger produces check runs associated with main's
HEAD, not the PR's head commit, so a successful retest never replaced
the original failed check in the PR status summary. Switching to a
pull_request_target labeled trigger keeps the same (workflow, event,
SHA) identity, so the new result properly supersedes the old one.

The ok_to_test label is removed immediately — before the authorization
check — so it can always be re-added regardless of whether the actor
was authorized.

Assisted-by: Claude Opus 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>
@owtaylor owtaylor requested a review from a team as a code owner July 6, 2026 14:24
@owtaylor owtaylor requested a review from alexxa July 6, 2026 14:24
@codecov

codecov Bot commented Jul 6, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.

Flag Coverage Δ
unittests 97.38% <ø> (+0.01%) ⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.
see 1 file with indirect coverage changes

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
  • 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant