Skip to content

Restructure test_and_docs.yml into two-stage DR-008 Option 4 flow#18

Draft
Subramanian-K812 wants to merge 21 commits into
mainfrom
Subramanian-K812_update_test_workflow_dr8
Draft

Restructure test_and_docs.yml into two-stage DR-008 Option 4 flow#18
Subramanian-K812 wants to merge 21 commits into
mainfrom
Subramanian-K812_update_test_workflow_dr8

Conversation

@Subramanian-K812

Copy link
Copy Markdown

No description provided.

@Subramanian-K812

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

@PiotrKorkus
Restructured test_and_docs.yml into the two-stage pipeline (Stage 1 integration + Stage 2 module validation). CI run 58f5b28 passed. To finalize, need input on four points:

  1. Stage 2 execution — Currently runs centrally from reference_integration using root git_override.
    → Confirm if this is acceptable as “module-scoped” per DR-008.

  2. Platform Integration Tests (PIT) — FIT runs in Stage 1 here; PIT runs in build_and_test_* workflows.
    → Should PIT be moved into this workflow, or just noted as external?

  3. Supported targets — Stage 2 UT/coverage runs only on linux-x86_64.
    → Acceptable as the mandatory gate, or should other architectures be included?

  4. Excluded tests — Some dev-only tests are skipped in central Stage 2 (listed in known_good.json).
    → Should we surface these exclusions explicitly in the consolidated report?

@PiotrKorkus PiotrKorkus left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

We need a class that will contain resolved deps versions from ref_int root and interface that will allow to scan MODULE file and overwrite version based on that resolved class.

Then we execute UTs, coverage directly in that locations. Collect all the reports, and fill the summary tables as currently.

The main entry point and place where module interact with ref_int by providing any information needs to be known_good.json

Comment thread .github/workflows/test_and_docs.yml Outdated
Comment on lines +143 to +144
# mechanism — each module is tested against the versions resolved in Stage 1,
# without modifying the module's released sources.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

how is it used? I dont see any usage of lockfile from previous job

Comment on lines 111 to 136
@@ -126,10 +134,145 @@ jobs:
path: github-pages.tar
retention-days: 3
if-no-files-found: error

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

why do we install it as last step? not needed?

Comment thread .github/workflows/test_and_docs.yml Outdated
Comment on lines +154 to +163
matrix:
module:
- score_baselibs
- score_baselibs_rust
- score_communication
- score_persistency
- score_orchestrator
- score_kyron
- score_lifecycle_health
- score_logging

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

dont hardcode it, we need to take it from know_good always

Comment thread .github/workflows/test_and_docs.yml Outdated
uses: actions/checkout@v4
- name: Execute Unit Tests with Coverage Analysis
run: |
python ./scripts/quality_runners.py --modules-to-test ${{ matrix.module }}

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

the goal of Option 4 is that we overwrite deps from resolved deps in ref_int and execute UTs and coverage directly in the modules - via bazel directories (preferable) or git checkout if there is a reason to not use bazel.

@Subramanian-K812 Subramanian-K812 force-pushed the Subramanian-K812_update_test_workflow_dr8 branch from dc36dc0 to cfad495 Compare June 24, 2026 09:48
…orch config, bazel_patches injection, genhtml errors
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.

2 participants