ci: manual deflake workflow [WPB-25106]

[emmaoke-w]

https://wearezeta.atlassian.net/browse/WPB-25106

---

PR Submission Checklist for internal contributors

• The PR Title

  • conforms to the style of semantic commits messages¹ supported in Wire's Github Workflow²
  • contains a reference JIRA issue number like SQPIT-764
  • answers the question: If merged, this PR will: ... ³

• The PR Description

  • is free of optional paragraphs and you have filled the relevant parts to the best of your ability

---

What's new in this PR?

• Renamed the existing QA Android UI workflow to reflect its actual purpose as the critical flow workflow.
• Reduced the default automatic failed-test rerun count from 2 to 1.
• Exported a standard deflake input artifact from the critical flow workflow, including run metadata and leftover failed tests.
• Added a separate QA Android UI Test Manual Deflake workflow.
• Made the manual deflake workflow download the artifact from a selected previous run and rerun only the failed tests from that run.
• Kept manual deflake reporting separate from the original run by generating a fresh Allure report for each deflake run.
• Re-exported the same deflake artifact from the manual deflake workflow so a deflake run can be deflaked again later.
• Reused the existing execution, retry, and reporting scripts where possible instead of introducing a second parallel implementation.

Issues

Briefly describe the issue you have solved or implemented with this pull request. If the PR contains multiple issues, use a bullet list.

Causes (Optional)

Briefly describe the causes behind the issues. This could be helpful to understand the adopted solutions behind some nasty bugs or complex issues.

Solutions

Briefly describe the solutions you have implemented for the issues explained above.

Dependencies (Optional)

If there are some other pull requests related to this one (e.g. new releases of frameworks), specify them here.

Needs releases with:

• GitHub link to other pull request

Testing

Test Coverage (Optional)

• I have added automated test to this contribution

How to Test

Briefly describe how this change was tested and if applicable the exact steps taken to verify that it works as expected.

Notes (Optional)

Specify here any other facts that you think are important for this issue.

Attachments (Optional)

Attachments like images, videos, etc. (drag and drop in the text box)

---

PR Post Submission Checklist for internal contributors (Optional)

• Wire's Github Workflow has automatically linked the PR to a JIRA issue

---

PR Post Merge Checklist for internal contributors

• If any soft of configuration variable was introduced by this PR, it has been added to the relevant documents and the CI jobs have been updated.

---

References

1. https://sparkbox.com/foundry/semantic_commit_messages
2. https://github.com/wireapp/.github#usage
3. E.g. feat(conversation-list): Sort conversations by most emojis in the title #SQPIT-764.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 50.80%. Comparing base (38fa9ce) to head (b9b90c1).
⚠️ Report is 1 commits behind head on develop.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff            @@
##           develop    #4772   +/-   ##
========================================
  Coverage    50.80%   50.80%           
========================================
  Files          605      605           
  Lines        20887    20887           
  Branches      3370     3370           
========================================
  Hits         10612    10612           
  Misses        9276     9276           
  Partials       999      999           

---

Continue to review full report in Codecov by Sentry.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 38fa9ce...b9b90c1. Read the comment docs.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

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

[yamilmedina]

question: do we need to remove ?

[emmaoke-w]

The commented code is deliberate, I want the test to fail so it can appear as a failed test when I want to manually rerun it.

[yamilmedina]

lgtm! some commented code perhaps we need to remove, or bring back?

[sonarqubecloud]

Quality Gate passed

Issues
0 New issues
0 Accepted issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
0.0% Coverage on New Code
0.0% Duplication on New Code

See analysis details on SonarQube Cloud

Suggestion implemented