Ignore peer review check and show pending status for running checks

[NicolasBonet]

Fixed Issues

$ https://github.com/Expensify/Expensify/issues/668743

Problem

The Github Actions: status shown on PR list items had two issues:

1. PRs failing only the "Verify peer review" workflow (its Check independent approval job) showed Github Actions: failure. That check fails by design until a peer review happens, so it's noise for the author — not a CI failure to act on.
2. PRs with checks still running showed Github Actions: success as soon as any single check completed successfully. Check runs only get a conclusion once they complete, so in-progress runs (conclusion: null) were silently skipped by the reducer.

Solution

In the check-run conclusion reducer (src/js/lib/actions/PullRequests.js):

• Skip check runs listed in a new IGNORED_CHECK_RUN_NAMES constant, currently just Check independent approval, so that check never affects the overall conclusion.
• Return a new pending conclusion when any check run has status !== 'completed'. Priority is now: failure > pending > success > skipped > unknown. No CSS change needed — non-success/failure statuses already render in the default orange.

Tests

1. Load the unpacked extension from dist/ after npm run build.
2. Open a K2 view (e.g. https://github.com/Expensify/Expensify#k2) and find the "Your Pull Requests" section.
3. Verify a PR whose only failing check is Check independent approval (e.g. a PR failing only the "Verify peer review" workflow) shows Github Actions: success in green.
4. Push a commit to a PR so its checks re-run, and verify the row shows Github Actions: pending in orange while checks are running.
5. Verify a PR with a genuinely failing check still shows Github Actions: failure in red.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

[roryabraham]

Can we simplify and just ignore this check outright for K2? I'm not sure we need this piece:

A PR with no human reviewer has nobody lined up to review it, so the failure stays visible as a prompt to find one.

Before we added the check, we never had this. So we should basically try to preserve the behavior we had before.

[NicolasBonet]

Can we simplify and just ignore this check outright for K2? I'm not sure we need this piece:

A PR with no human reviewer has nobody lined up to review it, so the failure stays visible as a prompt to find one.

Before we added the check, we never had this. So we should basically try to preserve the behavior we had before.

@roryabraham I felt like if this fails and no one is assigned, it's probably an issue on my end as I haven't assigned a reviewer, but we can follow up if we decide to do that.

[os-botify]

🚀 Released in version 1.5.51 🚀

[melvin-bot]

@NicolasBonet looks like this was merged without a test passing. Please add a note explaining why this was done and remove the Emergency label if this is not an emergency.

[NicolasBonet]

This missed @roryabraham:

Approver: