🌱 Add yamlfmt to ensure consistent testdata yaml file formatting

[perdasilva]

Description

• Adds the yamlfmt tool ref to bingo
• Updates the make fmt target to run yamlfmt against the testdata directory
• Applies consistent formatting to the testdata yaml files

Reviewer Checklist

• API Go Documentation
• Tests: Unit Tests (and E2E Tests, if appropriate)
• Comprehensive Commit Messages
• Links to related GitHub Issue(s)

[netlify]

✅ Deploy Preview for olmv1 ready!

Name	Link
🔨 Latest commit	6508ee4
🔍 Latest deploy log	https://app.netlify.com/projects/olmv1/deploys/68fa66a61ae98f0008989716
😎 Deploy Preview	https://deploy-preview-2284--olmv1.netlify.app
📱 Preview on mobile	Toggle QR Code... Use your smartphone camera to open QR code link.

---

To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify project configuration.

[Copilot]

Pull Request Overview

This PR adds the yamlfmt tool to ensure consistent YAML formatting across testdata files. The tool is integrated into the project's build system and applied to existing testdata files to standardize their formatting.

• Adds yamlfmt tool via bingo dependency management
• Integrates yamlfmt into the make fmt target to automatically format testdata YAML files
• Applies consistent formatting to existing testdata YAML files (removes leading --- markers, unwraps multi-line descriptions, normalizes spacing)

Reviewed Changes

Copilot reviewed 12 out of 17 changed files in this pull request and generated no comments.

Show a summary per file

File	Description
Makefile	Updated fmt target to include yamlfmt execution on testdata directory
.bingo/yamlfmt.mod	Added yamlfmt module dependency configuration
.bingo/yamlfmt.sum	Added checksums for yamlfmt and its dependencies
.bingo/variables.env	Added YAMLFMT environment variable
.bingo/Variables.mk	Added yamlfmt build target
testdata/images/catalogs/test-catalog/v2/configs/catalog.yaml	Removed leading --- marker
testdata/images/catalogs/test-catalog/v1/configs/catalog.yaml	Removed leading --- marker and trailing blank line
testdata/images/bundles/webhook-operator/v0.0.1/manifests/webhook.operators.coreos.io_webhooktests.yaml	Unwrapped multi-line description fields to single lines
testdata/images/bundles/test-operator/v1.2.0/manifests/olm.operatorframework.com_olme2etest.yaml	Removed leading --- marker
testdata/images/bundles/test-operator/v1.2.0/manifests/bundle.configmap.yaml	Unwrapped multi-line annotation value to single line and added trailing blank line
testdata/images/bundles/test-operator/v1.0.0/manifests/olm.operatorframework.com_olme2etest.yaml	Removed leading --- marker
testdata/images/bundles/test-operator/v1.0.0/manifests/bundle.configmap.yaml	Unwrapped multi-line annotation value to single line and added trailing blank line

---

_{Tip: Customize your code reviews with copilot-instructions.md. Create the file or learn how to get started.}

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 71.19%. Comparing base (85e8cbf) to head (6508ee4).
⚠️ Report is 2 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #2284      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   70.32%   71.19%   +0.87%     
==========================================
  Files          90       90              
  Lines        8794     6995    -1799     
==========================================
- Hits         6184     4980    -1204     
+ Misses       2196     1601     -595     
  Partials      414      414              

Flag	Coverage Δ
e2e	45.91% <ø> (+8.47%)	⬆️
experimental-e2e	14.72% <ø> (+0.51%)	⬆️
unit	58.79% <ø> (+0.44%)	⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

[camilamacedo86]

But I think it won’t be caught in the CI.
I mean, will it actually fail after this PR if the code isn’t formatted?
I think we should make sure that it’s being checked as well.

Just to share — in Kubebuilder we use this: ( to lint yaml )
👉 https://github.com/kubernetes-sigs/kubebuilder/blob/master/Makefile#L128-L131

[perdasilva]

it should be caught by the verify target since it calls the fmt target as well. So, changes ought to get caught by CI.

[perdasilva]

right?

[perdasilva]

Dropping the formatting commit to test

[perdasilva]

It does fail: https://github.com/operator-framework/operator-controller/actions/runs/18756733765/job/53510512776?pr=2284

[Copilot]

Pull Request Overview

Copilot reviewed 12 out of 17 changed files in this pull request and generated no new comments.

---

_{Tip: Customize your code reviews with copilot-instructions.md. Create the file or learn how to get started.}

[camilamacedo86]

/lgtm

[tmshort]

/approve

[openshift-ci]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: camilamacedo86, tmshort

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• OWNERS [tmshort]

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment