Skip to content

Fix duplicated YAML keys in c9k-failure-report.yml#11744

Merged
sylvainsf merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
fix-c9k-failure-report-yaml
Apr 23, 2026
Merged

Fix duplicated YAML keys in c9k-failure-report.yml#11744
sylvainsf merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
fix-c9k-failure-report-yaml

Conversation

@sylvainsf
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

What

Fixes .github/workflows/c9k-failure-report.yml, which currently fails to parse:

Invalid workflow file: .github/workflows/c9k-failure-report.yml#L1
(Line: 36, Col: 1): 'name' is already defined
(Line: 38, Col: 1): 'on' is already defined
(Line: 43, Col: 1): 'permissions' is already defined
(Line: 48, Col: 1): 'jobs' is already defined

Why

The merged file accidentally contained two stacked workflow definitions concatenated together, producing duplicate top-level keys (name, on, permissions, jobs) and a non-SHA-pinned uses: line in the second copy.

How

Replaced the file with a single, valid workflow definition:

  • One name, on, permissions: {}, and jobs: block
  • SHA-pinned to sylvainsf/causinator9000@5be8cf7dfbb78394eb7f6f2c97e2a9a5ab95deef # v1.9.0
  • Same inputs as originally intended (dry-run, 48h window, etc.)

No behavioral changes from the originally intended workflow, just removes the duplicated, invalid second copy.

Workflow file accidentally contained two stacked definitions, causing 'Invalid workflow file' errors (duplicate name/on/permissions/jobs keys). Replace with a single, valid workflow definition.
@sylvainsf sylvainsf requested review from a team as code owners April 23, 2026 06:04
Copilot AI review requested due to automatic review settings April 23, 2026 06:04
@github-actions
Copy link
Copy Markdown

This PR requires exactly 1 of the following labels: pr:standard, pr:important.
Currently applied labels: .

Label descriptions:

  • pr:important - Major features, breaking changes, deprecations, or other high-impact changes that need special attention during release.
  • pr:standard - Ongoing maintenance, minor improvements, documentation updates, and routine development work.

@sylvainsf, please add the appropriate label to this PR before merging.

@sylvainsf sylvainsf merged commit c41f296 into main Apr 23, 2026
43 of 46 checks passed
@sylvainsf sylvainsf deleted the fix-c9k-failure-report-yaml branch April 23, 2026 06:05
@radius-functional-tests
Copy link
Copy Markdown

radius-functional-tests Bot commented Apr 23, 2026

Radius functional test overview

🔍 Go to test action run

Click here to see the test run details
Name Value
Repository radius-project/radius
Commit ref f824823
Unique ID func374eefa583
Image tag pr-func374eefa583
  • gotestsum 1.13.0
  • KinD: v0.29.0
  • Dapr: 1.14.4
  • Azure KeyVault CSI driver: 1.4.2
  • Azure Workload identity webhook: 1.3.0
  • Bicep recipe location ghcr.io/radius-project/dev/test/testrecipes/test-bicep-recipes/<name>:pr-func374eefa583
  • Terraform recipe location http://tf-module-server.radius-test-tf-module-server.svc.cluster.local/<name>.zip (in cluster)
  • applications-rp test image location: ghcr.io/radius-project/dev/applications-rp:pr-func374eefa583
  • dynamic-rp test image location: ghcr.io/radius-project/dev/dynamic-rp:pr-func374eefa583
  • controller test image location: ghcr.io/radius-project/dev/controller:pr-func374eefa583
  • ucp test image location: ghcr.io/radius-project/dev/ucpd:pr-func374eefa583
  • deployment-engine test image location: ghcr.io/radius-project/deployment-engine:latest

Test Status

⌛ Building Radius and pushing container images for functional tests...
✅ Container images build succeeded
⌛ Publishing Bicep Recipes for functional tests...
✅ Recipe publishing succeeded
⌛ Starting ucp-cloud functional tests...
⌛ Starting corerp-cloud functional tests...
✅ ucp-cloud functional tests succeeded
✅ corerp-cloud functional tests succeeded

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Pull request overview

Fixes a YAML parse error in the C9K failure report workflow by removing an accidentally duplicated, concatenated workflow definition.

Changes:

  • Remove the duplicated top-level workflow block that caused duplicate name/on/permissions/jobs keys.
  • Keep a single valid workflow definition with SHA-pinned sylvainsf/causinator9000 usage.
  • Preserve the intended schedule/inputs (48h window, dry-run, etc.) while restoring workflow validity.

@@ -33,31 +33,3 @@ jobs:
auto-close-flaky: "true"
assign-copilot: "false"
github-token: ${{ secrets.GITHUB_TOKEN }}
Copy link

Copilot AI Apr 23, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Use ${{ github.token }} instead of ${{ secrets.GITHUB_TOKEN }} for the default workflow token. This matches the convention used across other workflows (e.g., .github/workflows/close-stale-prs.yml:25) and avoids treating the default token like a user-defined secret.

Suggested change
github-token: ${{ secrets.GITHUB_TOKEN }}
github-token: ${{ github.token }}

Copilot uses AI. Check for mistakes.
@codecov
Copy link
Copy Markdown

codecov Bot commented Apr 23, 2026

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 51.42%. Comparing base (d03e8ef) to head (f824823).
⚠️ Report is 2 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main   #11744   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   51.42%   51.42%           
=======================================
  Files         699      699           
  Lines       55723    55723           
=======================================
+ Hits        28654    28657    +3     
+ Misses      24901    24899    -2     
+ Partials     2168     2167    -1     

☔ 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.
  • 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

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