Skip to content

[CI] Recompile docs-noob-tester lock file to fix AWF firewall 404 - #19209

Merged
leecalcote merged 6 commits into
meshery:masterfrom
rishiraj38:fix/docs-noob-tester-awf-version
May 12, 2026
Merged

leecalcote merged 6 commits into
meshery:masterfrom
rishiraj38:fix/docs-noob-tester-awf-version

Conversation

@rishiraj38

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Notes for Reviewers

Fixes the Docs Noob Tester workflow (run #43) failing at "Install AWF binary".

The lock file was compiled with gh aw v0.71.1 which pinned gh-aw-firewall to v0.25.28 — a version that no longer exists, causing a 404 during download. This is a known upstream bug (#30705).

Recompiled the lock file with gh aw v0.71.5 which pins to firewall v0.25.40.

Signed commits

  • Yes, I signed my commits.

@github-actions github-actions Bot added the area/ci Continuous Integration label May 9, 2026

@gemini-code-assist gemini-code-assist Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Code Review

This pull request updates the actions-lock.json file, modifying the version keys and SHAs for the github-script and setup actions. The review feedback highlights that changing these version keys without corresponding updates in the workflow files will likely cause CI failures, as lock file resolution requires an exact match between the workflow's uses string and the lock file key. Additionally, the change from v9 to v9.0.0 for github-script introduces a formatting inconsistency compared to other entries in the file.

Comment thread .github/aw/actions-lock.json Resolved
Comment thread .github/aw/actions-lock.json Resolved
@rishiraj38

rishiraj38 commented May 9, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@leecalcote @Junnygram Please take a look.

@rishiraj38

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Since this PR was merged, this is just the lock file recompilation now.

@chaitanyamedidar

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Hey @rishiraj38 @Junnygram,

Went through the current workflow codebase and also reviewed #19236 to understand the recent first-time contributor workflow hardening.

I noticed that Meshery has a high volume of open PRs. I was exploring whether a review-stage structure could help make the PR queue easier to triage, for example with labels or automation around states like needs review, needs revision, changes requested, ci failing, ready to merge, or maintainer review needed. A later phase could also look at milestone/release-readiness classification if that is useful.

Do you think this kind of review-stage taxonomy or automation would be useful for Meshery?
If so, I could open an issue with a scoped proposal based on further discussion.

@leecalcote
leecalcote merged commit 4db3ed1 into meshery:master May 12, 2026
2 checks passed
leecalcote added a commit that referenced this pull request May 14, 2026
…rsion

[CI] Recompile docs-noob-tester lock file to fix AWF firewall 404
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

area/ci Continuous Integration

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants