Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

github workflows: remove release tests #19358

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Mar 3, 2025

Conversation

ivanvc
Copy link
Member

@ivanvc ivanvc commented Feb 7, 2025

This workflow has already been migrated to the prow infrastructure as a presubmit job, and it's stable.

The current GitHub workflow also has a second part, which uses Trivy to check for image vulnerabilities in the generated images. However, these results overlap (or duplicate) what we obtain with govulncheck, as our images are based on a distroless static Debian image. Therefore, it only checks the etcd binaries. For example, when we had the report of GO-2024-2527, it never failed.

So, I think we can delete it. Or, maybe another approach would be to move it to a periodic job.

Please read https://github.com/etcd-io/etcd/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md#contribution-flow.

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added github_actions Pull requests that update GitHub Actions code approved size/M labels Feb 7, 2025
@ahrtr
Copy link
Member

ahrtr commented Feb 7, 2025

However, these results overlap (or duplicate) what we obtain with govulncheck, as our images are based on a distroless static Debian image

govulncheck is scanning the golang source code, while trivy is scanning the image. They are different. I think we need both.

For example, when we had the report of GO-2024-2527, it never failed.

Do not get time to dig into the details. It shouldn't be a reason to remove trivy.

maybe another approach would be to move it to a periodic job.

I think It's better to run trivy on each PR instead of periodically. It doesn't take too much time or resource.

@ivanvc
Copy link
Member Author

ivanvc commented Feb 7, 2025

As this may be a longer conversation, I opened #19363.

@serathius
Copy link
Member

Needs rebase

@ivanvc
Copy link
Member Author

ivanvc commented Feb 12, 2025

Needs rebase

@serathius, I didn't rebase because I thought we should first discuss the controversial part of this pull request either here or in #19363. If there's no discussion by next week, I'll bring the topic to the next community meeting.

This workflow has already been migrated to the prow infrastructure as a
presubmit job.

Signed-off-by: Ivan Valdes <ivan@vald.es>
@ivanvc ivanvc force-pushed the remove-release-tests-workflow branch from 3448c70 to ed975c2 Compare February 28, 2025 07:45
@ivanvc
Copy link
Member Author

ivanvc commented Feb 28, 2025

/cc @ahrtr, @serathius

With an agreement on #19363. We can now remove the Trivy scan from this job.

Copy link

codecov bot commented Feb 28, 2025

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 68.74%. Comparing base (5c147c0) to head (ed975c2).
Report is 6 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

see 26 files with indirect coverage changes

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main   #19358      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   68.82%   68.74%   -0.09%     
==========================================
  Files         421      421              
  Lines       35901    35901              
==========================================
- Hits        24708    24679      -29     
- Misses       9762     9788      +26     
- Partials     1431     1434       +3     

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 5c147c0...ed975c2. Read the comment docs.

@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: ahrtr, ivanvc, serathius

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:

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

@ahrtr ahrtr merged commit 4ef3b37 into etcd-io:main Mar 3, 2025
33 checks passed
@ivanvc ivanvc deleted the remove-release-tests-workflow branch March 3, 2025 15:51
@ivanvc
Copy link
Member Author

ivanvc commented Mar 6, 2025

/cherry-pick release-3.6

@k8s-infra-cherrypick-robot

@ivanvc: #19358 failed to apply on top of branch "release-3.6":

Applying: github workflows: remove release tests
Using index info to reconstruct a base tree...
M	.github/workflows/release.yaml
Falling back to patching base and 3-way merge...
CONFLICT (modify/delete): .github/workflows/release.yaml deleted in github workflows: remove release tests and modified in HEAD. Version HEAD of .github/workflows/release.yaml left in tree.
error: Failed to merge in the changes.
hint: Use 'git am --show-current-patch=diff' to see the failed patch
hint: When you have resolved this problem, run "git am --continue".
hint: If you prefer to skip this patch, run "git am --skip" instead.
hint: To restore the original branch and stop patching, run "git am --abort".
hint: Disable this message with "git config advice.mergeConflict false"
Patch failed at 0001 github workflows: remove release tests

In response to this:

/cherry-pick release-3.6

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository.

ivanvc added a commit to ivanvc/etcd that referenced this pull request Mar 6, 2025
This workflow has already been migrated to the prow infrastructure as a
presubmit job.

Cherry-picks PR etcd-io#19358/commit ed975c2.

Signed-off-by: Ivan Valdes <ivan@vald.es>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
approved github_actions Pull requests that update GitHub Actions code size/M stage/merge-when-tests-green
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants