ci: align pre-commit hooks and GitHub templates - #161
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
github-actions
Bot
added
CI/CD
github-actions
Bot
added
the
chore
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
Grant issues:write to the labeling job (review feedback). TRI-1100
Greptile SummaryThis PR aligns the repository's CI and pre-commit configuration with the org-wide setup in
Confidence Score: 5/5Safe to merge — changes are CI/config only, no production code is touched, and the pull_request_target usage is correctly gated by a mutual-exclusion condition. All three changed files are CI infrastructure and pre-commit configuration. The pull_request_target pattern is intentional, well-documented, and correctly implemented. No application logic is affected. No files require special attention, though pre-commit.yml has minor style nits around the cache action version pin and missing restore-keys. Important Files Changed
Flowchart%%{init: {'theme': 'neutral'}}%%
flowchart TD
PR[Pull Request Event] --> IS_SAME{"Same-repo PR?<br/>head.repo == github.repository"}
IS_SAME -- Yes --> PE[pull_request event triggers]
IS_SAME -- No --> PTE[pull_request_target event triggers]
PE --> SAFE_JOB["conventional-pr job runs<br/>(read-only token, no fork secrets)"]
PTE --> FORK_JOB["conventional-pr job runs<br/>(write token — labels only)"]
SAFE_JOB --> REUSABLE["Calls org reusable workflow<br/>triton-inference-server/.github@v1.4.3"]
FORK_JOB --> REUSABLE
REUSABLE --> TITLE[Validate PR title vs Conventional Commits]
REUSABLE --> LABEL[Derive & apply type label]
REUSABLE --> CHERRY[Detect cherry-picks]
Reviews (2): Last reviewed commit: "ci: harden CI workflows and configs per ..." | Re-trigger Greptile |
![greptile-apps[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/867647?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
| permissions: | ||
| pull-requests: write | ||
| issues: write | ||
| uses: triton-inference-server/.github/.github/workflows/conventional-pr.yml@v1.4.2 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The PR description consistently references v1.4.1 throughout (in the "What does the PR do?" section, the "Depends on" callout, and the "Pros/Cons" block), but both this workflow and .pre-commit-config.yaml are actually pinned to v1.4.2. The two config files are self-consistent, but the mismatch against the description means anyone cross-referencing the description to validate what is deployed will be misled.
Note: If this suggestion doesn't match your team's coding style, reply to this and let me know. I'll remember it for next time!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Fixed - documentation drift: the descriptions have been refreshed to the current pinned tag v1.4.3 (they lagged behind the tag revisions; the tag exists and CI is green fleet-wide).
- 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
|
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 |
2 participants
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)