ci: file issue if sigstore test fails#538
Conversation
Unfortunately, we cannot run the sigstore test workflow on PR open because it requires 'id-token: write'-permissions, which is not available in that context. To still detect if a code change breaks the sigstore test, we run it after the fact when the PR gets merged, and submit an issue in case. This strategy is copied from test-kms.yml. Signed-off-by: Lukas Puehringer <[email protected]>
| jobs: | ||
| test-sigstore: | ||
| runs-on: ubuntu-latest | ||
| if: github.repository_owner == 'secure-systems-lab' # only run upstream |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@jku: I think we want this line in the kms workflow as well, even more than here actually. Because kms just fails in a fork that does not have GCP configured. Usually it even fails two times in a fork, once for the missing GCP config, and once for trying to submit an issue, which are disabled by default. It's not a big deal, but adds an ❌
Sigstore tests should pass in a fork, I just restricted the workflow to not unnecessarily spam sigstore certificate logs.
| "https://github.com/" + repo + "/actions/runs/" + context.runId + ")" | ||
| }) | ||
| console.log("New issue created.") | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is an almost exact copy of the "file an issue" step from test-kms.yml, which, in turn looks a lot like that step in check-upstream-ed25519.yml.
Unfortunately, I couldn't find a low-profile way of re-using the code. Composite actions requires a separate repo and a reusable workflow spins up a dedicated runner, which both seems overkill for a dozen lines of GitHub script.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
As an aside: I found out recently that apparently the gh tool is installed on the actions builders: I'm not a heavy user of that tool but... I'm pretty sure it could be used for this and that the result might be simpler than the javascript here
| uses: actions/github-script@98814c53be79b1d30f795b907e553d8679345975 | ||
| with: | ||
| script: | | ||
| const repo = context.repo.owner + "/" + context.repo.repo | ||
| const issues = await github.rest.search.issuesAndPullRequests({ | ||
| q: "Sigstore+tests+failed+in:title+state:open+type:issue+repo:" + repo, | ||
| }) | ||
| if (issues.data.total_count > 0) { | ||
| console.log("Issue open already, not creating.") | ||
| } else { | ||
| await github.rest.issues.create({ | ||
| owner: context.repo.owner, | ||
| repo: context.repo.repo, | ||
| title: "Sigstore tests failed", | ||
| body: "Hey, it seems Sigstore tests have failed, please see - [workflow run](" + | ||
| "https://github.com/" + repo + "/actions/runs/" + context.runId + ")" | ||
| }) | ||
| console.log("New issue created.") | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is what a qh version would like like. Haven't tried it in an action yet, only locally. I think it's cool, but I'm not sure if it is substantially easier to maintain than the JavaScript.
| uses: actions/github-script@98814c53be79b1d30f795b907e553d8679345975 | |
| with: | |
| script: | | |
| const repo = context.repo.owner + "/" + context.repo.repo | |
| const issues = await github.rest.search.issuesAndPullRequests({ | |
| q: "Sigstore+tests+failed+in:title+state:open+type:issue+repo:" + repo, | |
| }) | |
| if (issues.data.total_count > 0) { | |
| console.log("Issue open already, not creating.") | |
| } else { | |
| await github.rest.issues.create({ | |
| owner: context.repo.owner, | |
| repo: context.repo.repo, | |
| title: "Sigstore tests failed", | |
| body: "Hey, it seems Sigstore tests have failed, please see - [workflow run](" + | |
| "https://github.com/" + repo + "/actions/runs/" + context.runId + ")" | |
| }) | |
| console.log("New issue created.") | |
| } | |
| run: | | |
| title="Sigstore tests failed" | |
| issue_count=$(gh issue list --search "${title} in:title is:issue is:open" \ | |
| --json id --jq length) | |
| if [ "${issue_count}" == "0" ] | |
| then | |
| gh issue create \ | |
| --title "${title}" \ | |
| --body "Hey, it seems Sigstore tests have failed, \ | |
| please see - [workflow run](${GITHUB_SERVER_URL}/${GITHUB_REPOSITORY}/actions/runs/${GITHUB_RUN_ID})." | |
| else | |
| echo "Issue open already, not creating." | |
| fi | |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Oh, but we could save it in a script and re-use that.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
yeah, maybe not worth it 🤷 your call.
You will need an env variable to forward the token to the tool (GH_TOKEN: ${{ github.token }} I think) so that makes it yet a little more complicated
2 participants
Unfortunately, we cannot run the sigstore test workflow on PR open because it requires 'id-token: write'-permissions, which is not available in that context.
To still detect if a code change breaks the sigstore test, we run it after the fact when the PR gets merged, and submit an issue in case.
This strategy is copied from test-kms.yml.