ci: align pre-commit hooks and GitHub templates - #127
Conversation
Adopt the shared pre-commit baseline: two-line SPDX header, conventional commit message validation (commit-msg stage), and the centralized add-license / add-spdx-license hooks from developer_tools v0.2.0. Run pre-commit CI only on files modified by the PR, and roll out the standard issue templates and the simplified single PR template. TRI-1100
Legal's Copyright / License Header Guidance specifies the SPDX form without a comma after the year. TRI-1100
Human-readable type labels with enforced descriptions and colors. TRI-1100
The add-license hook now fails when the LICENSE copyright year is stale. TRI-1100
Workflow files are license-processed again (only templates excluded); refresh the stale copyright year this repo's pre-commit workflow carried. TRI-1100
Greptile SummaryThis PR aligns the repository's CI and local tooling with the org-wide baseline by introducing a thin
Confidence Score: 5/5Safe to merge — changes are limited to CI workflows and the pre-commit config; no production code is touched. All three files make narrow, well-scoped changes to CI infrastructure. The fork-PR event routing in No files require special attention. Important Files Changed
Sequence DiagramsequenceDiagram
participant Dev as Developer
participant GH as GitHub
participant PC as pre-commit (CI)
participant CP as conventional-pr (CI)
participant RW as Reusable Workflow<br/>(.github@v1.4.3)
Dev->>Dev: git commit (conventional-pre-commit hook validates msg)
Dev->>GH: Push / open PR
GH->>PC: pull_request event
PC->>PC: checkout (fetch-depth: 2)
PC->>PC: restore ~/.cache/pre-commit
PC->>PC: "git diff HEAD^1 HEAD (--diff-filter=d, -z)"
PC->>PC: xargs -0 pre-commit run --files
PC-->>GH: pass / fail
GH->>CP: pull_request (same-repo) OR pull_request_target (fork)
Note over CP: if condition guards event routing
CP->>RW: "uses: conventional-pr.yml@v1.4.3"
RW->>GH: Validate PR title (Conventional Commits)
RW->>GH: Derive and apply type label
RW-->>CP: pass / fail
CP-->>GH: status check result
Reviews (5): Last reviewed commit: "ci: harden CI workflows and configs per ..." | Re-trigger Greptile |
Grant issues:write to the labeling job (review feedback). TRI-1100
|
@greptileai review — the |
- conventional-pr stub: dual pull_request/pull_request_target triggers so fork PRs from external contributors get labeled too (the reusable workflow never checks out PR code); explicit contents:read; pinned v1.4.3. - pre-commit workflow: robust modified-files runner (null-delimited paths, deletion-only PRs handled, deleted paths filtered, no undocumented -r flag, cache keyed on config hash). - flake8 args quoted correctly (the flow-scalar form split at commas and silently reduced the select list). - hooks pinned to .github v1.4.3. TRI-1100
|
Want your agent to iterate on Greptile's feedback? Try greploops. |
|
Closing: the team is moving away from centralized org-level configuration in favor of per-repository self-contained setups (see triton-inference-server/server#8897 for the first decentralized implementation). Branch retained for reference. TRI-1100 |
What does the PR do?
Aligns this repository with the org-wide setup consolidated in triton-inference-server/.github:
.pre-commit-config.yaml: shared baseline hooks, conventional-commit message validation (commit-msg stage), and the centralizedadd-licensehook from the org.githubrepository (rev: v1.4.3— excludes.github/templates, never rewrites LICENSE files).conventional-prworkflow (@v1.4.3): validates the PR title against Conventional Commits (hard gate — it becomes the squash-merge commit), derives one human-readable label per distinct type found in the title and all conforming commit subjects (e.g.ci:→CI/CD,feat:→feature,fix:→fix), enforces org-wide label colors/descriptions, detects cherry-picks, and fails if no type is derivable and no type label is assigned.Depends on triton-inference-server/.github#5 (pinned tags current:
v1.4.3— already exist, CI is green).Pros / Cons
Pros
.githubrepo) for hooks, templates, issue routing, and the PR-title workflow — one change propagates everywhere.Cons / risks
.githubrepository (tags are write-once; changes ship as a new tag + rev bump)..githubrepository to remain public.Related Issues / PRs
Related PRs:
Test plan
pre-commit validate-configpasses;pre-commit run --files <PR diff>passes locally with the centralized hooks pinned to the .github branch SHA.v1.4.3exists: the conventional-pr check validates this PR's own title and applies thecilabel.Caveats
Checklist
<commit_type>: <Title>(conventional commit)