Comment-driven CI

[strickvl]

The slow CI will only run whenever someone (from the zenml core team) posts a /fulltest comment on the CI.

Unfortunately as per Github docs this new triggering will only come alive once the commit is merged onto the default branch (i.e. main i.e. after a new release) so you won't see any triggering here yet.

Problems:

• the check for who is making the comment is not especially robust. If someone changes their username to strickvl1 I think it'd pass the check + launch the workflow. Open to ideas / suggestions for improving this!

Summary by CodeRabbit

• New Features
  • Enhanced GitHub workflow to include an issue comment trigger.
  • Added a job to verify team membership within the CI process.

[coderabbitai]

Important

Auto Review Skipped

Auto reviews are disabled on this repository.

Please check the settings in the CodeRabbit UI or the .coderabbit.yaml file in this repository.

To trigger a single review, invoke the @coderabbitai review command.

Walkthrough

The update to the workflow configuration introduces a mechanism to trigger actions based on issue comments. It also adds a new job to check if the commenter is a team member, and modifies existing jobs to behave differently depending on the result of this membership check.

Changes

File Path	Change Summary
.github/workflows/ci-slow.yml	Added issue_comment trigger; introduced check-membership job; adjusted conditional statements in jobs to use check-membership output.

Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media?

Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

---

Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

• Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
  • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>.
  • Generate unit-tests for this file.
• Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
  • @coderabbitai generate unit tests for this file.
  • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
• PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
  • @coderabbitai generate interesting stats about this repository from git and render them as a table.
  • @coderabbitai show all the console.log statements in this repository.
  • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit tests.
  • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (invoked as PR comments)

• @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
• @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
• @coderabbitai review to trigger a review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
• @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
• @coderabbitai help to get help.

Additionally, you can add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.

CodeRabbit Configration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

• You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
• The JSON schema for the configuration file is available here.
• If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/coderabbit-overrides.v2.json

CodeRabbit Discord Community

Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.

[strickvl]

let's try this

[strickvl]

trying again

[strickvl]

@coderabbitai review

[coderabbitai]

Review Status

Actionable comments generated: 1

Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml

Commits

Files that changed from the base of the PR and between 4b7314c and 2f03f48.

Files selected for processing (1)

• .github/workflows/ci-slow.yml (9 hunks)

Additional comments: 5

.github/workflows/ci-slow.yml (5)

• 17-29: The check-membership job correctly sets an output based on whether the commenter is a team member. However, this approach may be vulnerable to spoofing if a non-member changes their username to match a team member's username. It's recommended to use GitHub's API to check for organization membership, which provides a more secure verification method.

• 31-35: The conditional statement for the docstring-check job is well-structured to ensure that the job only runs under the correct circumstances. However, the condition seems to be missing a check for the presence of the /fulltest comment. This should be verified to ensure that the CI is only triggered by the specific comment.

• 49-53: The conditional statements for the other jobs, such as small-checks, spellcheck, update-templates-to-examples, custom-ubuntu-unit-test, windows-unit-test, macos-unit-test, windows-integration-test, macos-integration-test, and custom-ubuntu-integration-test, are consistent with the docstring-check job. Ensure that all these conditions are tested to confirm that they work as intended.

Verification successful

The search results from the .github/workflows/ci-slow.yml file show that there are multiple if conditions present, all of which include the check for needs.check-membership.outputs.member_check == 'true' and github.event.pull_request.draft. However, the output does not show the full condition, specifically the part that checks for the presence of the /fulltest string in the comment body.

To ensure that the conditions are consistent and include the necessary checks as mentioned in the review comment, we need to see the full if conditions. Since the previous command truncated the results, we should adjust the search to display the full lines.

---

The search results confirm that the if conditional statements in the .github/workflows/ci-slow.yml file are consistent across multiple jobs. Each if statement includes the following checks:

1. needs.check-membership.outputs.member_check == 'true' - to verify if the commenter is a member of the core team.
2. github.event.pull_request.draft == false - to ensure the pull request is not a draft.
3. github.event.issue.pull_request - to check if the event is associated with a pull request.
4. contains(github.event.comment.body, '/fulltest') - to check if the comment contains the /fulltest command.

These conditions align with the review comment's requirement for consistency and the inclusion of the necessary checks. Therefore, the conditional statements for the jobs mentioned in the review comment have been verified to be consistent and include the required checks.

Scripts Executed

The following scripts were executed for the analysis:

---

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Verify that the conditions for all jobs are consistent and include the necessary checks.
ast-grep --lang yaml --pattern $'if: $_ && contains($_, "/fulltest")' .github/workflows/ci-slow.yml

Length of output: 209

---

---

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Search for the conditional 'if' statements in the ci-slow.yml file that include the string "/fulltest"
rg 'if: .+contains\(github.event.comment.body,\s*'/fulltest'\)' .github/workflows/ci-slow.yml

Length of output: 93

---

---

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Correcting the search pattern and attempting to search again for the conditional 'if' statements in the ci-slow.yml file
rg "if: .+contains\(github.event.comment.body, '/fulltest'\)" .github/workflows/ci-slow.yml

Length of output: 99

---

---

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Simplifying the search pattern to ensure correct syntax and attempting to search again for the conditional 'if' statements in the ci-slow.yml file
rg "if: .+ '/fulltest'" .github/workflows/ci-slow.yml

Length of output: 61

---

---

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Broadening the search to include any 'if' statements in the ci-slow.yml file
rg "^ +if:" .github/workflows/ci-slow.yml

Length of output: 1013

---

---

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Search for the full 'if' conditional statements in the ci-slow.yml file to verify consistency
rg "^ +if:.*" .github/workflows/ci-slow.yml -A 1

Length of output: 1937

* 106-110: The `update-templates-to-examples` job includes a condition to check if the PR is from a forked repository. This is a good practice to prevent actions from running on untrusted code. Ensure that this logic is correctly implemented and tested.

Verification successful

---

The output from the script shows the relevant lines from the .github/workflows/ci-slow.yml file, specifically lines 101 to 115. The condition mentioned in the review comment is present on lines 108 to 110. It checks several conditions, including whether the comment was made by a team member, the PR is not a draft, the comment contains /fulltest, and importantly, whether the head repository of the pull request is the same as the base repository (github.event.pull_request.head.repo.full_name == github.repository). This last condition effectively checks that the PR is not from a forked repository.

The comment on line 111, # this doesn't work on forked repositories (i.e. outside contributors), further clarifies that the job is disabled for PRs from forked repositories, which aligns with the best practice mentioned in the review comment.

Based on the provided script output, the logic to prevent actions from running on untrusted code from forked repositories is correctly implemented in the update-templates-to-examples job within the ci-slow.yml workflow.

Scripts Executed

The following scripts were executed for the analysis:

---

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Verify that the condition to check for forked repositories is correctly implemented.
ast-grep --lang yaml --pattern $'if: $_ && github.event.pull_request.head.repo.full_name == github.repository' .github/workflows/ci-slow.yml

Length of output: 250

---

---

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Search for the condition within the ci-slow.yml file using ripgrep
rg 'if: .+ && github.event.pull_request.head.repo.full_name == github.repository' -A 3 .github/workflows/ci-slow.yml

Length of output: 118

---

---

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Display the contents of the ci-slow.yml file around lines 106-110
cat -n .github/workflows/ci-slow.yml | sed -n '101,115p'

Length of output: 906

* 202-207: For the `custom-ubuntu-integration-test` job, the strategy matrix and exclusion list are well-defined to optimize the test runs. However, ensure that the exclusion logic is working as expected and that it doesn't exclude necessary test runs.

Verification successful

The output from the rg command indicates that there is an exclude keyword present in the .github/workflows/ci-slow.yml file. However, the output does not provide the context or content of the exclusion logic. To verify the review comment regarding the exclusion logic within the matrix strategy, we need to see the actual lines of code that define this logic.

To gather the necessary information, I will generate a new script to extract the relevant section of the ci-slow.yml file that contains the exclude keyword along with some lines of context around it.

---

The output from the rg command provides the context of the exclude keyword within the strategy section of the .github/workflows/ci-slow.yml file. The exclusion logic is set up to prevent certain combinations of test_environment and python-version from running together. Specifically, it excludes the docker-server-docker-orchestrator-mysql and docker-server-docker-orchestrator-mariadb test environments from running on Python versions 3.9, 3.10, and 3.11, indicating that these tests are only intended to run on Python version 3.8.

Based on the provided output, the exclusion logic appears to be correctly implemented to optimize the test runs by running the time-consuming docker tests only on Python version 3.8 and not on the other versions.

Scripts Executed

The following scripts were executed for the analysis:

---

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Verify that the exclusion logic in the matrix strategy is correctly implemented.
ast-grep --lang yaml --pattern $'exclude: $$$' .github/workflows/ci-slow.yml

Length of output: 186

---

---

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Search for the 'exclude' keyword within the 'ci-slow.yml' file to inspect the matrix strategy and exclusion list.
rg 'exclude' .github/workflows/ci-slow.yml

Length of output: 59

---

---

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Extract the relevant section around the 'exclude' keyword to review the matrix strategy and exclusion logic.
rg -C 10 'exclude' .github/workflows/ci-slow.yml

Length of output: 1004

[avishniakov]

LGTM, one suggestion to verify

[strickvl]

/fullci

[strickvl]

/fulltest